The Supreme Court

Total Questions: 50

41. Which one of the following pairs (Article- provision) is not correctly matched? [UP R.O./A.R.O. (Pre) 2023]

Correct Answer: (a) Article 124 - Supreme Court to be a Court of Record.
Solution:Article 124 of the Indian Constitution deals with the Establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court. Significantly, Article 129 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to be a Court of Record.
  • The power to punish for contempt is a significant attribute of courts of record, aimed at preserving the dignity and authority of the judiciary.
  • Contempt proceedings can be initiated against individuals or entities that show disrespect, disobedience, or interference with the court's proceedings.
  • This power acts as a deterrent, reinforcing the sanctity of the judicial process and maintaining public confidence in the judiciary's ability to dispense justice.
  • The SC in the case of P N Duda v. V P Shiv Shankar & Others (1988) held that under Article 129 of the Constitution, the SC has the power to punish for contempt of itself and under Article 143(2) it could investigate any such contempt.

42. Consider the following statements: [I.A.S. (Pre) 2022]

1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.

2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves.

3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.

4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Correct Answer: (b) 1, 2 and 4
Solution:In 1961 the H.N. Sanyal Committee was constituted and to pursue its recommendation, the contempt of courts Act, 1971 was passed.

• Under Article 129 and Article 215, the Supreme Court and high court shall be a court of record and shall have all the power of such including the power to punish for contempt.

• The expression 'contempt of court' has not been defined by the constitution. It has been defined in the contempt of Courts Act 1971

• In India, the parliament has powers to make laws on contempt of court. Thus statements 1, 2 and 4 are correct.

43. The Supreme Court holds its meetings in New Delhi, but it can meet elsewhere - [U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2008]

Correct Answer: (a) With the approval of President.
Solution:The Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint (Art. 130).

The numerous other powers of the Supreme Court can be seen as follows:

  • It decides the disputes regarding the election of President and Vice-President.
  • In this regard, it has the original, exclusive, and final authority.
  • It enquires into the conduct and behavior of the Chairman and members of UPSC, SPSC, or JSPSC on a reference made by the President.
  • It is authorized to withdraw the cases pending before the High Courts and dispose them by itself.
  • It can transfer a case or appeal pending before one High Court to another High Court.
  • Its law is binding on all courts in India
  • Its decree or order is enforceable throughout the country.
  • It has the power of judicial superintendence and control over all the courts and tribunals functioning in the entire country.

44. In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court of India enunciated the 'Doctrine of Basic Structure'? [U.P.P.C.S. (Mains) 2012]

Correct Answer: (c) Keshvanand Bharti
Solution:In the case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. the State of Kerala, (1973) a thirteen-Judges bench of the Indian Supreme Court, by a majority of 7:6, stated that the Parliament could only amend the Constitution to the extent that it did not "damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution" (under Article 368). Constitutional amendments are subject to judicial review; the Court essentially placed a substantive non-legislative check upon the Parliament's power of amendment.

45. Which one of the following cases propounded the concept of 'Basic structure' of the Indian Constitution? [U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 2014 U.P. Lower Sub. (Mains) 2013]

Correct Answer: (d) None of the above
Solution:In the case of Keshavananda Bharti vs. the State of Kerala, (1973) a thirteen-Judges bench of the Indian Supreme Court, by a majority of 7:6, stated that the Parliament could only amend the Constitution to the extent that it did not "damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution" (under Article 368). Constitutional amendments are subject to judicial review; the Court essentially placed a substantive non-legislative check upon the Parliament's power of amendment.

46. Which of the following Articles of the Constitution of India have been declared by the Supreme Court as the 'Inviolable basic structure' of the Constitution: [U.P.P.C.S. (Pre) 1999]

Select the correct answer from the code given below:

1. Article 32

2. Article 226

3. Article 227

4. Article 245

Correct Answer: (a) 1, 2 and 3
Solution:A Larger Bench of seven Judges in the Kesavananda Bharati Case unequivocally declared that the power of judicial review over legislative action vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution is an integral and essential feature of the Constitution, constituting part of its basic structure. Article 227 defines; that every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises Jurisdiction. These three Articles were declared the inviolable basic structure of the constitution of India in the Kesavananda Bharati Case.

47. The source of the 'Basic Structure Theory of the Constitution' in India is - [U.P. U.D.A./L.D.A. (Mains) 2010]

Correct Answer: (b) Judicial Interpretation
Solution:The Parliament could not use its amending powers under Article 368 to 'damage,' destroy,' 'abrogate,' change' or alter the 'basic structure' or framework of the Constitution. The view expressed in Keshavananda Bharati Case was subsequently approved in the Minerva Mill's Case, 1980.

The Basic Structure Doctrine is a crucial legal principle that has shaped the interpretation of India's Constitution. Emerging from the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case, this doctrine asserts that there are fundamental features of the Constitution that cannot be altered by any amendments made by the Parliament. It safeguards the essential principles and values that reflect the vision of the framers, ensuring that the core structure of the Constitution remains intact.
Over time, the Basic Structure Doctrine has been reinforced by significant judgments from the Supreme Court, which have consistently upheld its importance in protecting the Constitution's integrity. Despite its critical role, the doctrine has also faced criticism, particularly regarding its potential to limit parliamentary sovereignty and the scope of constitutional amendments.

48. The second largest bench Constituted by the Supreme Court till date was in the - [U.P.P.C.S. (Spl) (Mains) 2004]

Correct Answer: (a) Golaknath Case
Solution:The largest bench (13 Judges) constituted by the Supreme Court till date was in the case of Keshavananda Bharati (1973). The second largest bench (11 Judges) constituted by the Supreme Court till date was in the Case of Golaknath vs. the State of Punjab (1967).

The Golaknath case (1967) centred on the Golaknath family, who challenged the Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act, which imposed limits on land ownership to facilitate redistribution. They contended that the Act violated their Fundamental Rights to property, asserting that such rights should be immune from legislative alteration and subject to judicial review under Article 13.
The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament lacks the authority to amend Fundamental Rights, introducing the doctrine of prospective overruling, reinforcing the inviolability of these rights, and establishing a foundation for the Basic Structure Doctrine in future jurisprudence.

49. In which of the following cases, Supreme Court held that? [U.P.P.C.S.(Pre) 2012]

"Fundamental Rights enable a man to chalk out his life in the manner he likes best "?

Correct Answer: (b) Golaknath Vs. The State of Punjab
Solution:The Supreme Court held the above concept in the Case of Golaknath Vs. the State of Punjab.

The Golaknath case (1967) centred on the Golaknath family, who challenged the Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act, which imposed limits on land ownership to facilitate redistribution. They contended that the Act violated their Fundamental Rights to property, asserting that such rights should be immune from legislative alteration and subject to judicial review under Article 13.
The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament lacks the authority to amend Fundamental Rights, introducing the doctrine of prospective overruling, reinforcing the inviolability of these rights, and establishing a foundation for the Basic Structure Doctrine in future jurisprudence.

50. Identify the incorrect pair of Case and Ruling in that case by Supreme Court: [R.A.S./R.T.S. (Pre) 2013]

Correct Answer: (d) Bella Banerjee Case- Right to travel abroad is a part of personal liberty.
Solution:Bella Banerjee Case is related to the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act, 1948. The right to travel abroad as a part of personal liberty was considered in the case of Maneka Gandhi (1978). The pair of option (d) is incorrect.

Bela Banerjee case- In this case the court focused on how to interpret Articles 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitution. The Supreme Court of India decided that in Article 31(2), the word "compensation" meant providing the owner with a fair equivalent for what they lost.
To change this interpretation, the 4th constitutional amendment was passed in 1955. This amendment explicitly stated that courts could not question the inadequacy of compensation.