Q1. Which of the following is not included in the definition of ‘State’ under Article 12?
- LIC
- Judiciary acting in its judicial capacity
- ONGC
- Municipal Corporation
Correct Option: 2. Judiciary acting in its judicial capacity.
Explanation: While the judiciary is part of the State when performing administrative or non-judicial functions, it is not considered ‘State’ under Article 12 when performing purely judicial functions, as it is not amenable to writ jurisdiction for judgments.
Q2. The power of judicial review in India with respect to Fundamental Rights originates from:
- Article 226
- Article 32
- Article 13
- Article 131
Correct Option: 3. Article 13.
Explanation: Article 13 explicitly declares that any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void, thereby forming the constitutional basis for judicial review. Articles 32 and 226 provide mechanisms for enforcement, not origin.
Q3. Which of the following Articles cannot be suspended during a National Emergency under any circumstances?
- Article 20 and 21
- Article 19 and 22
- Article 16 and 17
- Article 14 and 15
Correct Option: 1. Article 20 and 21.
Explanation: Only Articles 20 and 21 are explicitly non-suspendable during a National Emergency as per Article 359(1) and judicial interpretation post 1978 (44th Amendment).
Q4. Which Article grants the Parliament the power to modify the application of Fundamental Rights to the armed forces?
- Article 33
- Article 34
- Article 35
- Article 31B
Correct Option: 1. Article 33.
Explanation: Article 33 empowers Parliament to restrict or abrogate the Fundamental Rights of armed forces, police, intelligence agencies, etc., to ensure discipline and proper discharge of duties.
Q5. In which case did the Supreme Court hold that the Preamble is a part of the Constitution and can be used in interpreting ambiguous provisions?
- A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras
- Golaknath v. State of Punjab
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
- Berubari Union Case
Correct Option: 3. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala.
Explanation: The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) overruled earlier opinions (like in Berubari) and held that the Preamble is part of the Constitution and can be used for interpretation.