Fundamental Rights — Set 6

Correct Answer: D. Japan

• **Japan** = the source of the phrase 'Procedure Established by Law' used in Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. • **Contrast with USA** — USA uses 'Due Process of Law' (a more substantive standard) meaning the law itself must be just and fair; India's original 'Procedure Established by Law' meant only that a procedure enacted by law must be followed — any procedure passed by legislature sufficed (more restrictive standard). • 💡 Option A (France) is wrong because France contributed Liberty, Equality, Fraternity (as ideals) and the Republic concept — not 'procedure established by law'; Option B (UK) is wrong because UK contributed Parliamentary system, Rule of Law, and single citizenship — not this specific phrase; Option C (USA) is wrong because USA uses 'Due Process of Law' which is exactly the OPPOSITE approach — it is NOT the source of 'Procedure Established by Law'.

Correct Answer: B. Article 32

• **Article 32** = guarantees the right to move the SUPREME COURT for enforcement of Fundamental Rights; this right itself is a Fundamental Right. • **Art.32 vs Art.226** — Art.32 (Supreme Court) = FR enforcement only, narrower scope, but is itself a FR; Art.226 (High Courts) = both FRs AND legal rights, wider scope, but is NOT itself a FR — so Art.226 can be restricted by legislation. • 💡 Option A (Article 19) is wrong because Art.19 guarantees freedoms like speech and movement — not the right to move the Supreme Court; Option C (Article 13) is wrong because Art.13 declares void laws inconsistent with FRs — it empowers the judiciary but does not give citizens the right to approach the SC; Option D (Article 226) is wrong because while Art.226 gives High Courts writ jurisdiction, it is NOT itself a FR and it is broader (covers legal rights too).

Correct Answer: B. Article 14

• **Article 14** = the Fundamental Right available to FOREIGNERS (and all persons) in India; it uses the phrase 'any person' instead of 'any citizen'. • **Citizen vs Person** — Arts.15, 16, 19, 29, 30 use 'citizen' so they are available only to Indian citizens; Arts.14, 20, 21, 21A, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 use 'person' so available to foreigners too. • 💡 Option A (Article 15) is wrong because Art.15 uses 'citizen' — foreigners CANNOT invoke it; it is only for Indian nationals; Option C (Article 16) is wrong because Art.16 also uses 'citizen' in the context of public employment — not available to foreigners; Option D (Article 19) is wrong because Art.19 explicitly says 'All citizens shall have the right' — it is only for citizens, not foreigners.

Correct Answer: C. OBC

• **OBC** = the Mandal Commission Report pertains to reservation for Other Backward Classes (OBC) in central government jobs and educational institutions. • **Mandal Commission** — formally known as Second Backward Classes Commission; set up by PM Morarji Desai in 1979; submitted report recommending 27% OBC reservation; implemented by PM V.P. Singh in 1990 leading to nationwide protests. • 💡 Option A (ST) is wrong because ST (Scheduled Tribe) reservation of 7.5% was provided from the original Constitution — not by the Mandal Commission; Option B (EWS) is wrong because EWS reservation was added by the 103rd Amendment 2019 — not by the Mandal Commission; Option D (SC) is wrong because SC (Scheduled Caste) reservation of 15% was also from the original Constitution — not Mandal Commission.

Correct Answer: B. Article 33

• **Article 33** = empowers Parliament to restrict FRs of (1) Armed Forces, (2) Forces charged with maintenance of public order, (3) Persons employed in intelligence or counter-intelligence organisations, (4) Analogous forces. • **Parliament Exclusive** — ONLY Parliament can legislate under Art.33; state legislatures cannot; restrictions must be by law, not executive order; courts cannot question such laws. • 💡 Option A (Article 35) is wrong because Art.35 gives Parliament exclusive power to make laws to enforce certain FRs listed in Part III — it is different from Art.33 which is about restricting FRs of specific forces; Option C (Article 32) is wrong because Art.32 is the Right to Constitutional Remedies — not about restricting FRs of intelligence organisations; Option D (Article 34) is wrong because Art.34 deals with restriction of FRs during Martial Law — not specifically for intelligence organisations.

Correct Answer: A. Parliament

• **Parliament** = the only body that has the power to legislate to give effect to Fundamental Rights under Article 35 of the Constitution. • **Article 35** — specifies that ONLY Parliament (not state legislatures) can make laws to punish acts declared crimes by FRs (Art.17 — untouchability, Art.23 — trafficking) and to give effect to Arts.16(3), 32(3), 33, 34; ensures uniform enforcement across India. • 💡 Option B (State Legislature) is wrong because Art.35 explicitly excludes state legislatures from making laws to enforce FRs — this is Parliament's exclusive domain; Option C (President) is wrong because the President signs bills but cannot initiate legislation to give effect to FRs — that is Parliament's role; Option D (Supreme Court) is wrong because the Supreme Court enforces FRs through Art.32 but does NOT legislate — legislation is Parliament's function.

Correct Answer: D. Pre-constitutional laws

• **Pre-constitutional laws** = the Doctrine of Eclipse applies to laws that existed BEFORE the Constitution came into force (January 26, 1950); if they violate FRs, they are eclipsed (shadowed/dormant) but not void. • **Doctrine of Eclipse** — pre-constitutional laws become dormant (not void ab initio) if they conflict with FRs; if the FR is amended or removed so the conflict disappears, the law 'revives' and becomes operative again; distinguished from post-constitutional laws which are void if they violate FRs. • 💡 Option A (Ordinances) is wrong because ordinances are post-constitutional executive acts — if they violate FRs they are void, not eclipsed; the Eclipse doctrine is specifically for pre-constitutional laws; Option B (Post-constitutional laws) is wrong because post-constitutional laws that violate FRs are simply void under Art.13(2) — the Eclipse doctrine does NOT apply to them; Option C (Amendments) is wrong because constitutional amendments are tested against the Basic Structure doctrine, not the Doctrine of Eclipse.

Correct Answer: C. Article 21

• **Article 21** = the right to travel abroad is considered part of 'personal liberty' under Article 21 of the Constitution. • **Maneka Gandhi Case, 1978** — Maneka Gandhi's passport was impounded by the government without giving reasons; SC held that Art.21 covers the right to travel abroad; established the Golden Triangle (Arts.14+19+21) test; procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable. • 💡 Option A (Article 19) is wrong because Art.19(1)(d) only protects movement within India — it does NOT cover international travel or right to travel abroad; Option B (Article 25) is wrong because Art.25 covers freedom of conscience and religion — completely unrelated to the right to travel abroad; Option D (Article 14) is wrong because Art.14 guarantees equality before law — it does not specifically protect the right to travel abroad.

Correct Answer: A. Reasonable

• **Reasonable** = the standard that restrictions on freedoms under Article 19 must meet; restrictions that are arbitrary, excessive, or disproportionate are unconstitutional. • **Court's Role** — courts decide whether a restriction is 'reasonable' based on factors like: proportionality, necessity, and the nature of the freedom being restricted; 'reasonable' is judged both substantively and procedurally. • 💡 Option B (Arbitrary) is wrong because arbitrary restrictions are UNCONSTITUTIONAL under Art.14 (equality) — the Constitution requires restrictions to be reasonable, not arbitrary; Option C (Absolute) is wrong because no FR is absolute in the Constitution — all FRs can be restricted on reasonable grounds; Option D (Permanent) is wrong because permanent restrictions would defeat the purpose of the FR — courts can review and strike down permanent blanket restrictions.

Correct Answer: B. Article 14

• **Article 14** = embodies the Rule of Law in the Indian Constitution; guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws to all persons. • **A.V. Dicey's Rule of Law** — three elements: (1) Supremacy of Law (no arbitrary power), (2) Equality before Law (no person is above the law), (3) Predominance of Legal Spirit (courts as the source of rights); Article 14 reflects elements 1 and 2. • 💡 Option A (Article 32) is wrong because Art.32 is the Right to Constitutional Remedies — it empowers citizens to enforce FRs but is not the article that embodies Rule of Law; Option C (Article 19) is wrong because Art.19 guarantees freedoms like speech and movement — not Rule of Law; Option D (Article 21) is wrong because Art.21 protects life and personal liberty — Rule of Law as a concept is specifically associated with Art.14's equality guarantee.