Question Description
Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for UPSC 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Consider the following statements:Statement-I:The Supreme Court ruling in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) upheld several provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), confirming the Enforcement Directorates (ED) extensive powers in investigating and arresting those accused of money laundering.Statement-II:The Supreme Court in Pankaj Bansal v. Union of India (2023) emphasized that the accused have a fundamental right under Article 20 of the Constitution to be informed of the grounds of their arrest, and failure to provide written grounds would render the arrest illegal.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?a)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct, but Statement-II does not explain Statement-Ib)Both Statement-I and Statement-II are correct and Statement-II explains Statement-Ic)Statement-I is correct, but Statement-II is incorrectd)Statement-I is incorrect, but Statement-II is correctCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice UPSC tests.