Laxmikanth Test : Emergency Provisions Solved MCQs UPSC Indian Polity

2 only

Under the Constitution, Article 358 provides for suspension of the freedoms guaranteed by Article 19 while a proclamation of emergency under Article 352 is in operation. However, after the 44th Amendment, Article 358 was confined to emergencies on the grounds of war or external aggression, so the Article 19 freedoms are not automatically suspended when the emergency is proclaimed on the basis of armed rebellion.

Article 359 empowers the President, by order during a proclaimed emergency under Article 352, to suspend the right to move any court for enforcement of specified Fundamental Rights. This suspension expressly excludes the protections guaranteed by Articles 20 and 21, which remain enforceable even during such suspension.

Hence, the first statement is incorrect and the second statement is correct.

Only two

Statement 1 is correct. Under Article 360 the President may proclaim a financial emergency; while it operates the executive power of the Union extends to giving directions to States about measures to secure financial stability and credit, so the Centre acquires overriding control over the States' financial policy and administration.

Statement 2 is correct. As part of those powers the President can require that any money bills or other financial measures passed by a State legislature be reserved for consideration (i.e., not be finally dealt with by the State) so that the Union can give directions on them.

Statement 3 is incorrect. Although the President may require reduction of salaries and allowances of persons serving in connection with the affairs of a State, the Constitution expressly protects the pay of Supreme Court judges: Article 125 provides that the salaries of Supreme Court judges shall not be diminished during their continuance in office. For that reason the President cannot lawfully direct a reduction in the salaries of Supreme Court judges; reductions affecting other categories (and subject to constitutional safeguards) are a different matter.

In short: under Article 360 the Centre gains extensive control over state finances and can require reservation of financial bills, but it cannot lawfully reduce the salaries of Supreme Court judges.

Neither 1 nor 2

Statement 1 is incorrect. Under Article 352 the President may revoke a proclamation of national emergency by issuing a subsequent proclamation; such revocation does not require prior or separate approval of the Parliament. The original proclamation must be laid before both Houses of Parliament, which can approve or disapprove it, but the act of revocation can be done unilaterally by the President.

Statement 2 is incorrect. A proclamation of national emergency must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within one month; if approved it remains in force for six months and may be extended by resolutions of both Houses for further periods of up to six months at a time. There is no maximum limit of three years; the emergency can be continued beyond that period subject to parliamentary approval every six months.

Thus, both statements are factually wrong.

2 only

Statement 1 is incorrect. Under Article 356, a presidential proclamation must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within two months. If approved, it initially remains in force for six months and may be extended by Parliamentary resolutions for further periods of six months each, subject to conditions; the total continuous period cannot exceed three years (with specified safeguards). If the House of the People is dissolved so that it cannot approve the proclamation, a proclamation approved by the Council of States may remain in force until 30 days after the reassembly of the Lok Sabha.

Statement 2 is correct. While a proclamation under Article 356 is in force, the President assumes the functions of the state government; executive powers ordinarily exercised by the Governor are exercised under the authority of the President, and the state legislature's powers are exercisable by or under the authority of Parliament.

Only one

Statement 1 is incorrect. The enforcement of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 cannot be suspended in the manner suggested. The constitutional scheme for suspension of certain Fundamental Rights during an emergency is governed by Article 358 and Article 359, and the position was clarified by amendments (notably the 44th Amendment) and subsequent jurisprudence so that Article 21 is not to be treated as freely suspendable in the way Article 19 rights are.

Statement 2 is correct. When the President takes over the administration of a State under Article 356, Parliament exercises the State's legislative functions under Article 357. If the Lok Sabha (or Parliament) is not in session and urgent expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of the State is required, the President may authorize such expenditure temporarily, subject to subsequent parliamentary approval.

Statement 3 is incorrect. Under Article 360 (provisions relating to a Financial Emergency), the President may issue directions for observance of financial propriety, including directions for the reduction of the salaries and allowances of all or any class of persons in the service of the Union or of the States. The provision does not carve out an explicit exemption for judges of the Supreme Court or High Courts, so the categorical exclusion stated is not correct.

A: 1 only

Article 360 empowers the President to proclaim a financial emergency when satisfied that the financial stability or credit of India or any part thereof is threatened.

The proclamation must be laid before both Houses of Parliament and approved within two months. Approval in each House is by a simple majority (majority of members present and voting). Therefore the first statement is correct.

The proclamation can be revoked by the President and revocation does not require a special majority in Parliament; parliamentary approval is not needed for revocation. Thus the second statement is incorrect.

In practice, a financial emergency under Article 360 has never been declared in India (it was not proclaimed during the 1991 crisis). Consequently the third statement is incorrect.

1 only

The power to limit a national emergency to part of the territory was introduced by the 42nd Amendment (1976), which allows a proclamation under Article 352 to apply to the whole of India or to any part thereof; such a proclamation must be approved by both Houses of Parliament within one month as required by Article 352(3).

A proclamation cannot be made solely on the personal advice of the Prime Minister. The President acts on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers headed by the Prime Minister, and the 44th Amendment (1978) added the safeguard that an emergency proclamation must be supported by the written recommendation of the Cabinet, preventing unilateral action by a single minister.

Hence, only the option "1 only" is correct.

1 only

Preventive detention is the confinement of a person without a criminal trial to prevent the person from committing acts prejudicial to public order or state security; it is grounded on the detaining authority's satisfaction or a reasonable belief, not on a judicial finding of guilt after trial.

Legislative power to enact preventive detention laws is not vested solely in the Parliament. Both the Parliament and the State Legislatures can make such laws depending on the subject-matter: public order falls in the State List, so states may legislate for preventive detention in that area, while the Centre legislates on Union subjects (e.g., defense, security).

The Constitution expressly addresses preventive detention: Article 22(3) permits preventive detention laws, and Article 22(4) provides that no person shall be detained under such a law for more than three months unless an Advisory Board reports sufficient cause for continued detention. Thus the Constitution does specify a temporal safeguard.

Consequently, only the first statement is correct; the second and third statements are incorrect.

A: 1 only

Article 34 is correctly described: it empowers Parliament to make laws suspending the applicability of the rights contained in Part III while martial law is in force in an area. Thus the first statement is correct in substance.

The second statement is incorrect. The Constitution does not contain a formal definition of martial law; the term is a common-law concept generally understood to mean the suspension of ordinary civil law and the exercise of authority by military tribunals or military authorities, but that description is not a constitutional definition.

The third statement is also incorrect as stated. A declaration of martial law does not by itself automatically suspend habeas corpus; any suspension of the enforceability of fundamental rights requires the statutory or constitutional mechanism provided (for example, action by Parliament under Article 34, or suspension of enforcement under Article 359 in the context of a constitutional emergency). In short, suspension of habeas corpus would follow only if the appropriate legal steps are taken, not merely by a bare declaration.

Therefore, only the first statement is correct.

President: The power to proclaim a financial emergency vests in the President of India.

Under Article 360, the President may issue a proclamation if satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby the financial stability or credit of India is threatened. Any such proclamation must be laid before both Houses of Parliament and will cease to operate at the end of two months unless approved by resolutions of both Houses; if approved, it continues until revoked by the President. While a proclamation is in force, the Union may give directions to States regarding financial matters (for example, on expenditures, borrowing and payments), and those directions are binding on the States.

1.✅National Emergency: Declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion

This is correctly matched. According to Article 352, a National Emergency can be declared during war, external aggression, or armed rebellion.

2. ❌President's Rule: Declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit

This is incorrectly matched. President's Rule (Article 356) is declared due to the failure of the constitutional machinery in states, not in response to a financial threat.

3. ❌Financial Emergency: Requires a written recommendation from the cabinet

This is incorrectly matched. Financial Emergency (Article 360) is declared in response to a threat to India's financial stability or credit, but it does not specifically require a written recommendation from the cabinet. It is the National Emergency that requires a written recommendation from the cabinet under Article 352.

4. ❌National Emergency: Grounds include 'armed rebellion' and 'internal disturbance'

This is incorrectly matched. The original term 'internal disturbance' was replaced by 'armed rebellion' by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Hence, 'internal disturbance' is no longer a ground for declaring National Emergency.

Thus, only the first pair is correctly matched.

Statement-I states that during a National Emergency in India, Article 358 automatically suspends the Fundamental Rights under Article 19. This is accurate as Article 358 does indeed suspend these rights during a National Emergency.

However, Statement-II claims that during a National Emergency in India, the President is authorized to suspend the right to move any court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights under Article 21. This statement is incorrect. Article 21 deals with the protection of life and personal liberty and is not subject to suspension during a National Emergency. Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Article 21 cannot be suspended even during an Emergency. Therefore, Statement-II is incorrect, making option c the correct answer.

• ❌Statement 1: This statement is incorrect. The grounds for declaring a National Emergency include war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. The original term "internal disturbance" was replaced with "armed rebellion" by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978. Therefore, "internal disturbance" is no longer a valid ground for declaring a National Emergency.
• ✅Statement 2: This statement is correct. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 introduced the requirement for a written recommendation from the cabinet for the President to declare a National Emergency, ensuring a collective decision-making process.
• ✅Statement 3: This statement is correct. A National Emergency can indeed be proclaimed for the entire country or a specified part of it, as per the provisions of Article 352 of the Indian Constitution.

Thus, the correct statements are 2 and 3. Hence, the correct answer is Option C: 2 and 3 Only.

• ✅Article 358: Suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during National Emergency :Correct.
  Article 358 provides for the automatic suspension of Fundamental Rights under Article 19 during a National Emergency declared on the grounds of war or external aggression.
• ❌Article 359: Suspension of Fundamental Rights under Articles 20 and 21 during National Emergency : Incorrect. 
  Article 359 allows the President to suspend the enforcement of certain Fundamental Rights, but it explicitly excludes Articles 20 and 21. These two rights cannot be suspended even during a National Emergency, as per the 44th Amendment Act of 1978.
• ✅Article 360: Financial Emergency declaration and consequences :Correct.
  Article 360 allows the President to declare a Financial Emergency if the financial stability or credit of India is threatened. During this period, salaries of government employees can be reduced, and all money bills passed by state legislatures are subject to the President's approval.
• ✅Article 352: Declaration of National Emergency due to war, external aggression, or armed rebellion :Correct.
  Article 352 empowers the President to declare a National Emergency on the grounds of war, external aggression, or armed rebellion. This provision was amended by the 44th Amendment Act, which replaced "internal disturbance" with "armed rebellion."

Therefore,Correct Answer : Option C

• ✅1962 Emergency: Proclaimed due to Chinese aggression in NEFA (now Arunachal Pradesh) : Correct.
  The 1962 Emergency was proclaimed under Article 352 due to external aggression by China during the Sino-Indian War, particularly in the NEFA region.

• ❌1971 Emergency: Proclaimed due to internal disturbances : Incorrect.
  The 1971 Emergency was proclaimed under Article 352 due to external aggression by Pakistan during the Indo-Pak war, which led to the liberation of Bangladesh. It was not due to internal disturbances.

• ❌1975 Emergency: Proclaimed due to an attack by Pakistan : Incorrect.
  The 1975 Emergency was proclaimed under Article 352 on the grounds of internal disturbance, following political instability and the Allahabad High Court judgment disqualifying Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.

• ✅Shah Commission: Appointed to investigate the circumstances of the 1975 Emergency : Correct.
  The Shah Commission was established in 1977 by the Janata Party government to investigate the excesses and circumstances surrounding the imposition of the 1975 Emergency.

Therefore,Correct Answer - Option B