All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Direction: Read the following passage careful... Start Learning for Free
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:
In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.
Q. To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the association's members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?
  • a)
    The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.
  • b)
    The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.
  • c)
    The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.
  • d)
    The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your CLAT doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questio...
The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld. The Central Government has the authority to declare an organisation illegal if it gets involved in illegal activity, thus the court can sustain the proclamation on that basis.
Therefore, Option A is the proper response.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questio...


Explanation:

Authority of Central Government:
- The UAPA Act empowers the Central Government to declare an organization unlawful if it believes that it has started engaging in illegal activities.
- The proclamation can be upheld based on this authority given to the Central Government.

Grounds for Declaration:
- The Central Government must state the grounds for declaring an association unlawful.
- If the group has participated in inciting violence, it can be considered a valid ground for the declaration.

Approval by Tribunal:
- The usual procedure requires the Tribunal's approval for the declaration to take effect.
- However, there is an exception where the Central Government can declare an association unlawful with immediate effect if certain circumstances necessitate such action.

Legal Activity vs. Illegal Activity:
- While promoting the rights of an ethnic community is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, engaging in activities that incite violence is illegal.
- The proclamation can be upheld based on the illegal activities carried out by the association rather than its legal intentions.

Therefore, in this scenario, the Central Government's declaration of the group as unlawful can be maintained under the UAPA Act due to the illegal activities, such as inciting violence, in which the association has been involved.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Passage: The President’s notification of the Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order of 2019 of August 5 amends Article 370 of the Indian Constitution and scraps its 65-year-old predecessor, The Constitution (Application to Jammu and Kashmir) Order of May 14, 1954. By junking the 1954 Order, the notification takes away the special rights and privileges enjoyed by the residents of Kashmir. It has effectively allowed the entire provisions of the Constitution, with all its amendments, exceptions and modifications, to apply to the area of Jammu and Kashmir. This is evident from the text of the August 5, 2019 notification. For one, the 2019 notification “supersedes” the 1954 Order. And two, it declares that “all the provisions of the Constitution, as amended from time to time, shall apply in relation to the State of Jammu and Kashmir”. It is important to note that Article 370(1)( c) explicitly mentions that Article 1 of the Indian Constitution applies to Kashmir through Article 370. Article 1 lists the states of the Union. This means that it is Article 370 that binds the state of J&K to the Indian Union. Removing Article 370, which can be done by a Presidential Order, would render the state independent of India, unless new overriding laws are made. The August 5 notification has been issued under Article 370 of the Constitution. In short, the government has employed Article 370, which had once protected the 1954 Order giving special rights to the people of Jammu and Kashmir, to scrap the sexagenarian Order.So far, the Parliament had only residuary powers of legislation in J&K. This included enacted of laws to prevent terror and secessionist activities, for taxation on foreign and inland travel and on communication. Now, the Centre has proposed the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Bill of 2019, which says the new Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir would be administered/governed like the Union Territory of Puducherry.The tabling of the proposed Reorganization Bill is also proof that the long reign of the 1954 Order has ended. The 1954 Order had introduced a proviso to Article 3, namely that “no Bill providingfor increasing or diminishing the area of the State of Jammu and Kashmir or altering the name or boundary of that State shall be introduced in Parliament without the consent of the Legislature of that State". That power of the State Legislature to give prior consent does not exist anymore. This has provided a free hand to the Centre to table the Re-organization Bill.The 1954 Order had also brought into existence Article 35A. This Article gave the State Legislature of Jammu and Kashmir exclusive power to define classes of persons who are/shall be permanent residents of the State; to confer permanent residents special rights and privileges and impose restrictions upon other persons from outside the State; make laws and conditions for State government employment, acquisition of immovable property, settlement rights, scholarships and other forms of aid from the State government.With the removal of the 1954 Order, the power of the State Legislature ceases to exist and Parliamentary laws, including that of reservation, would apply to Jammu and Kashmir as it does in other parts of the country. The government called this the end of “positive discrimination” and the closing of the “chasm” between residents of J&K and citizens of other parts of the country. The removal of the 1954 Order further also negates a clause which was added to Article 352. The Order had mandated that no proclamation of Emergency on grounds “only of internal disturbance or imminent danger shall have effect” in the State unless with the concurrence of the State government.The second part of the August 5, 2019 notification deals with the addition of a new clause to Article 367 which amends the proviso to clause (3) of 370. Article 367 deals with the applicability of the General Clauses Act 1897 to interpret the provisions of the Constitution,.The August 5 notification amends the expression “Constituent Assembly”, contained in the proviso to clause (3) of Article 370, to mean “Legislative Assembly”.Clause (3) of Article 370 gives the President power to end the special rights and privileges of the people of Jammu and Kashmir under the 1954 Order. However, the clause carries a rider. That is, the President would have to first get the consent of the Constituent Assembly of J&K before issuing such a notification. This rider or check on the President’s power was intended to give the people of the State a say in their own future. Now, theConstituent Assembly has ceased to exist since 1956, when it was dissolved. The Assembly, at the time of its dissolution, had said nothing about the abrogation of Article 370. Consequently, Article 370, though it resides among the ‘temporary provisions’ of the Constitution, is deemed have become a permanent feature of the Constitution.The August 5 notification has tided over this obstacle of a non-existent ‘Constituent Assembly’ by amending the expression in the proviso to ‘Legislative Assembly’. Ideally, any such amendment to the name of the ‘Constituent Assembly’ would require the assent of the Constituent Assembly itself. Besides, an amendment in Article 370 should have undergone the constitutional amendment procedure envisaged under Article 368 of the Constitution.But the government can, on the other hand, argue that the amendment made in its August 5 notification only applies to Jammu and Kashmir and not the entire Dominion of India, and so, does not require a constitutional amendment. This point of contention may reach the Supreme Court, where several petitions on the constitutionality of Article 35A, and in consequence Article 370, are pending for adjudication.Q.The new order promugulated by the President has removed the legislature of J&K. The New UT is governed on the lines of _______________?

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. 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 Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. 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 Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:In a significant verdict of March 2023, the Supreme Court on overruled its 2011 judgments in Arup Bhuyan vs State of Assam, Indra Das vs State of Assam and State of Kerala vs Raneef which held that mere membership of a banned association is not sufficient to constitute an offence under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 or the Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, unless it is accompanied with some overt violent act. A 3 Judge bench upheld Section 10(a)(i) of the UAPA which makes membership of an association, which has been declared to be unlawful, to be an offence. The UAPA Act extends to the whole of India. Anyone in our country who violates this Act’s provisions and is found to be responsible is subject to punishment under this Act. Any person who commits an offense outside of India that is punishable by this Act would be treated in accordance with its provisions in the same way as if the offense had been committed within India. The provisions of this Act apply also to-citizens of India outside India; persons in the service of the Government, wherever they may be; persons on ships and aircraft, registered in India, wherever they may be. As per UAPA, if the Central Government believes that a certain association is or has become an unlawful association, it may proclaim the association to be unlawful by publishing a notice in the Official Gazette. Each of these notifications must state the grounds for their issuance. No such notification shall take effect until the Tribunal has approved the declaration contained therein except:- The Central Government may, for reasons to be stated in writing, declare an association to be unlawful with immediate effect if it believes that circumstances exist that make such a declaration necessary.Q.To promote the rights of one specific ethnic community in India, a group of people established an association. The Central Government declares the group to be illegal on the grounds that it has participated in inciting violence. One of the associations members disputes the declaration. Which of the following legal defenses would allow the court to maintain the proclamation?a)The UAPA Act gives the Central Government the authority to declare an organisation unlawful if it thinks that it has started engaging in illegal activities, therefore the proclamation can be upheld.b)The proclamation cannot be upheld because, absent some overt act of violence, mere associational membership is not a crime under the UAPA Act.c)The declaration in the proclamation can only be upheld if the Tribunal has given its approval.d)The association was established with the intention of promoting the rights of a certain ethnic community, which is a legal activity under the Indian Constitution, hence the proclamation cannot be upheld.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
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
Get App
© 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