Consider the following statements regarding Ambedkar's interpretation of Constitutional Morality in the Constituent Assembly:
1. B.R. Ambedkar defined constitutional morality in the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution.
2. Ambedkar drew his interpretation of constitutional morality primarily from the writings of the British historian George Grote regarding the Athenian democracy.
3. Ambedkar integrated the concept of constitutional morality into the Preamble of the Constitution during the 1947 drafting sessions to ensure its legal enforceability by the Supreme Court.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution. Statement 2 is correct because he explicitly credited the British historian George Grote, who used the term to describe the need for a 'vigorous efflorescence of reverence' for the laws in Athenian democracy. Statement 3 is incorrect because constitutional morality is not explicitly mentioned in the Preamble, nor was it inserted as a specific provision for legal enforceability; rather, it is a judicial doctrine evolved by the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution beyond its literal text.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality vs Public Morality in judicial discourse:
1. The Supreme Court in the Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) ruling noted that constitutional morality encompasses the protection of minority rights against the tyranny of the majority.
2. In the Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) judgment, the court struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code by asserting that constitutional morality prioritizes individual autonomy over traditional patriarchal norms.
3. George Grote, a 19th-century historian, first coined the term 'constitutional morality' to describe the practice of self-restraint among political actors in a democracy.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the SC in the NCT of Delhi case emphasized that constitutional morality acts as a check against majoritarianism to protect minority interests. Statement 2 is correct because the Joseph Shine judgment explicitly invoked constitutional morality to invalidate Section 497, ruling that individual autonomy and gender equality override archaic patriarchal social norms. Statement 3 is correct as the term was indeed coined by 19th-century historian George Grote to denote the necessity of 'reverence' and self-restraint for the functioning of a democratic constitution.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as an instrument for social engineering and justice:
1. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court identified constitutional morality as a counter-majoritarian tool to protect the rights of sexual minorities.
2. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment introduced the doctrine of constitutional morality as a foundational pillar of the basic structure, alongside the principle of judicial review.
3. Article 142 of the Constitution provides the Supreme Court with the power to invoke constitutional morality for complete justice, a provision originally drafted by the Drafting Committee in 1947.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) explicitly defined constitutional morality as a shield for the rights of sexual minorities against majoritarian impulses. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, but the explicit articulation of 'constitutional morality' as a distinct judicial tool gained prominence much later, particularly in the 21st century. Statement 3 is incorrect because while Article 142 grants the Supreme Court plenary power to do 'complete justice,' it does not explicitly mention 'constitutional morality,' which is a jurisprudential principle developed by the judiciary rather than a provision drafted in 1947.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a limit on the amending power of Parliament:
1. The Supreme Court in the 1973 Golaknath case held that constitutional morality serves as the primary legal doctrine for determining the validity of amendments under Article 13(2).
2. George Grote, a 19th-century historian, originally coined the term constitutional morality to describe the adherence to the spirit of the law rather than just its literal text.
3. The Delhi High Court in the 2009 Naz Foundation case referenced constitutional morality as a basis for protecting the rights of sexual minorities against discriminatory legislative enactments.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, not constitutional morality, was established in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case to limit the amending power, whereas the Golaknath case (1967) dealt with the status of Fundamental Rights. Statement 2 is correct as the term was coined by historian George Grote to describe the necessity of a 'reverence for the forms of the constitution' in a democracy. Statement 3 is correct because the Delhi High Court in the 2009 Naz Foundation case explicitly invoked constitutional morality to decriminalize consensual homosexual acts, arguing that the Constitution must protect individual autonomy against majoritarian morality.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a check on majoritarianism:
1. Article 32 of the Indian Constitution provides for the enforcement of constitutional morality through the issuance of writs, a provision adopted from the 1935 Government of India Act.
2. The Kesavananda Bharati judgment of 1973 introduced the doctrine of constitutional morality as a component of the basic structure, drawing inspiration from the 1949 Irish Constitution.
3. The Preamble to the Constitution includes the term constitutional morality as a core value, reflecting the influence of the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because constitutional morality is a judicial doctrine derived from the spirit of the Constitution rather than a specific text-based provision. Statement 1 is false as Article 32 empowers the Supreme Court to protect fundamental rights, not explicitly 'constitutional morality', and it was not adopted from the 1935 Act. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, but it did not explicitly name 'constitutional morality' as a component, nor was it inspired by the Irish Constitution. Statement 3 is false because the term 'constitutional morality' does not appear in the Preamble, and the Preamble is primarily inspired by the American Constitution, not the 1789 French Declaration.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of secularism and religious freedom:
1. In the 2019 Ayodhya title suit judgment, the Supreme Court referenced constitutional morality as a principle that balances competing claims of faith and secular legal standards.
2. Article 25 of the Constitution provides for the freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion, subject to public order, morality, and health.
3. The 1950 Constitution, as originally drafted, included a specific clause in Article 25 that defined constitutional morality as the primary test for limiting religious freedom.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court in the 2019 Ayodhya verdict invoked constitutional morality to harmonize the secular nature of the state with the competing religious claims of the parties involved. Statement 2 is correct because Article 25 explicitly guarantees religious freedom subject to public order, morality, and health, where 'morality' is interpreted through the lens of constitutional values. Statement 3 is incorrect because the original 1950 Constitution does not contain a specific clause defining 'constitutional morality'; this concept has evolved primarily through judicial interpretation and jurisprudence rather than explicit constitutional text.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of individual autonomy vs social norms:
1. The 1951 First Amendment to the Constitution incorporated the doctrine of constitutional morality into Article 19, allowing the state to restrict individual autonomy whenever social norms regarding public order are challenged by private conduct.
2. In the 2018 Joseph Shine v. Union of India case, the court observed that constitutional morality prioritizes the dignity of the individual over the traditional social norms that previously governed marital fidelity.
3. The 1994 S.R. Bommai v. Union of India case held that constitutional morality is synonymous with the preamble's mention of secularism, and it grants the executive the authority to prioritize collective social harmony over individual privacy rights.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because in Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court struck down Section 497 of the IPC, ruling that constitutional morality mandates that individual dignity and autonomy supersede patriarchal social norms regarding marital fidelity. Statement 1 is incorrect because the First Amendment (1951) introduced 'reasonable restrictions' on Article 19(2) but did not codify 'constitutional morality,' which is a judicial doctrine developed later. Statement 3 is incorrect because S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) identified secularism as a 'basic feature' of the Constitution, but it did not grant the executive authority to override individual privacy rights; in fact, constitutional morality serves as a check on executive and majoritarian power.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as an instrument for social engineering and justice:
1. The 1992 Indra Sawhney case incorporated constitutional morality into the interpretation of reservation policies, aligning with the recommendations of the First Backward Classes Commission.
2. The 2017 Puttaswamy judgment establishes constitutional morality as a justiciable right under Article 21, mirroring the legal framework found in the German Basic Law of 1949.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during the Constituent Assembly debates on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the tyranny of the majority.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his November 4, 1948 speech, famously described constitutional morality as a 'governing sentiment' essential to prevent the tyranny of the majority and ensure the survival of democratic institutions. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Indra Sawhney case (1992) dealt with the implementation of the Mandal Commission (Second Backward Classes Commission), not the First Backward Classes Commission (Kalelkar Commission). Statement 2 is incorrect because while the Puttaswamy judgment (2017) emphasized constitutional morality, it did not establish it as a standalone justiciable right under Article 21, nor is it explicitly mirrored from the German Basic Law of 1949.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the functioning of constitutional bodies:
1. The National Commission for Scheduled Castes operates under the 89th Amendment, which formally codified constitutional morality as the primary criteria for selecting commission members.
2. The Supreme Court in the 2019 Ajit Kumar Nag v. General Manager (PJ) case acknowledged that constitutional bodies function within the parameters of constitutional morality to maintain institutional integrity.
3. The 2006 M. Nagaraj v. Union of India verdict incorporated constitutional morality into Article 16(4A), which allows the state to define the parameters of reservation in promotions for public sector employees.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court has consistently invoked constitutional morality to ensure that constitutional bodies operate within the rule of law to preserve institutional integrity. Statement 1 is incorrect because the 89th Amendment Act, 2003, bifurcated the National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, but it did not codify constitutional morality as a criterion for member selection. Statement 3 is incorrect because the M. Nagaraj case (2006) focused on the 'creamy layer' and 'compelling reasons' for reservation in promotions under Article 16(4A), but it did not formally incorporate constitutional morality as a legal test for reservation parameters.
Consider the following statements regarding Ambedkar's interpretation of Constitutional Morality in the Constituent Assembly:
1. In his speech delivered on November 25, 1949, Ambedkar emphasized that constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment but one that needs to be cultivated.
2. The concept of constitutional morality was invoked by Ambedkar to caution against the danger of placing blind faith in great men during the assembly debates.
3. Ambedkar argued that the Constitution is merely a mechanism for the peaceful resolution of conflicts, which forms the core of constitutional morality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
In his final speech on November 25, 1949, Dr. Ambedkar famously described constitutional morality as a 'natural sentiment' that must be cultivated rather than assumed, while simultaneously warning against 'hero-worship' in politics as a path to dictatorship. He further defined the Constitution as a mechanism for peaceful social change and conflict resolution, emphasizing that the document's success depends on the public's adherence to these democratic values. As all three statements accurately reflect these core tenets of his address to the Constituent Assembly, they are entirely correct.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in expanding the scope of Article 21:
1. The 1997 Vishaka Guidelines were formulated by the Supreme Court using the principle of constitutional morality to create a new fundamental right under Article 21 that is separate from the right to equality.
2. Justice B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the subversion of democratic processes.
3. The 2017 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India verdict established that the right to privacy is an intrinsic part of Article 21, drawing upon the concept of constitutional morality to limit state intrusion.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as Dr. Ambedkar defined constitutional morality as a 'governing sentiment' essential to prevent the subversion of democratic processes. Statement 3 is correct because the Puttaswamy judgment (2017) utilized constitutional morality to interpret the right to privacy as an intrinsic part of the right to life and liberty under Article 21. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Vishaka Guidelines (1997) were issued under Article 32 to fill a legislative vacuum, and they primarily derived their authority from the right to equality (Article 14) and the right to life (Article 21) rather than creating a 'separate' fundamental right.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the protection of minority rights:
1. Article 30(1) of the Indian Constitution provides for the right of all minorities, based on religion or language, to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.
2. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech on 4 November 1948, defined constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution.
3. The Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment observed that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to protect minority rights.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Article 30(1) explicitly empowers religious and linguistic minorities to establish and administer educational institutions. Statement 2 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his 1948 Constituent Assembly speech, defined constitutional morality as a 'paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution' to ensure democratic stability. Statement 3 is correct as the Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar judgment emphasized that constitutional morality serves as a vital counter-majoritarian check, ensuring that the fundamental rights of minorities are not subsumed by the will of the majority.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the functioning of constitutional bodies:
1. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the doctrine of constitutional morality as a formal amendment to Article 368, providing the judiciary with the power to review executive ordinances.
2. Article 142 of the Constitution provides the Supreme Court with the authority to invoke constitutional morality to bypass the 1992 Panchayati Raj Act provisions regarding local body elections.
3. The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 introduced the term constitutional morality into the Preamble, which serves as a guiding principle for the Election Commission of India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
None of the statements are correct because 'constitutional morality' is a judicial doctrine derived from the spirit of the Constitution rather than a formal amendment to Article 368, nor was it ever inserted into the Preamble by the 42nd Amendment. Furthermore, Article 142 grants the Supreme Court power to do 'complete justice' but does not empower it to bypass statutory provisions like the Panchayati Raj Act, which is governed by Part IX of the Constitution. The concept is an interpretive tool used by the judiciary to uphold constitutional values, not a statutory provision or a defined amendment.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a check on majoritarianism:
1. The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 incorporated constitutional morality into the Fundamental Duties, aligning the Indian framework with the 1977 Soviet Constitution.
2. The concept of constitutional morality was invoked by the Supreme Court in the NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) verdict to emphasize the collaborative federalism inherent in the constitutional scheme.
3. The Supreme Court in the A.K. Gopalan case (1950) defined constitutional morality as the adherence to the letter of the law, setting a precedent for subsequent judicial review.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court in the NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) case used constitutional morality to interpret the unique federal relationship between the Centre and the NCT, advocating for collaborative federalism. Statement 1 is incorrect because constitutional morality is a judicial doctrine derived from the spirit of the Constitution, not an explicit provision added by the 42nd Amendment Act. Statement 3 is incorrect because the A.K. Gopalan case followed a strict 'procedure established by law' approach, whereas the modern doctrine of constitutional morality-which prioritizes the spirit and values of the Constitution over mere literalism-was notably articulated in later landmark judgments like Navtej Singh Johar (2018).
Consider the following statements regarding Relationship between Constitutional Morality and the Basic Structure Doctrine:
1. Constitutional morality is defined in the 1976 42nd Amendment Act as the guiding principle for the President of India when exercising discretionary powers under Article 74.
2. The 1967 Golaknath case introduced the concept of constitutional morality to limit the judicial review powers of the High Courts, effectively creating a distinction between constituent and legislative power.
3. The Supreme Court in the 2019 Sabarimala judgment applied the basic structure doctrine to invalidate state-level religious statutes, asserting that the doctrine acts as a substitute for the Directive Principles of State Policy.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because constitutional morality is a judicial construct derived from the spirit of the Constitution, not defined in the 42nd Amendment. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Golaknath case (1967) dealt with the power of Parliament to amend Fundamental Rights, while the Basic Structure Doctrine was formally introduced in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). Statement 3 is incorrect because the Sabarimala judgment invoked constitutional morality to uphold individual rights over exclusionary religious practices, and the Basic Structure Doctrine is not a substitute for the Directive Principles of State Policy but a limitation on the amending power of Parliament.
Consider the following statements regarding Distinction between Constitutional Morality and Constitutionalism:
1. Constitutional morality is a principle derived from the 1935 Government of India Act, and it functions as the historical basis for the federal distribution of powers between the Union and the States.
2. The Supreme Court of India, in the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, observed that constitutional morality serves as a counter-majoritarian check against popular morality.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the subversion of the legal framework.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because constitutional morality is a dynamic, evolving principle rooted in the spirit of the Constitution itself, rather than a specific provision derived from the Government of India Act 1935. Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) emphasized that constitutional morality acts as a bulwark against majoritarian impulses, ensuring the protection of individual rights. Statement 3 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar famously described constitutional morality as a 'sentimental' requirement to ensure the effective functioning of the legal framework and prevent its subversion by those in power.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in expanding the scope of Article 21:
1. The 1984 Olga Tellis judgment integrated the concept of constitutional morality into the definition of the right to life, which resulted in the immediate provision of permanent housing for all urban dwellers.
2. The 2019 Sabarimala review petition invoked constitutional morality to argue that Article 21 guarantees the right to religious practice, which takes precedence over the fundamental rights of women to enter the temple.
3. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment, the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to protect the individual rights of sexual minorities under Article 21.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the Navtej Singh Johar (2018) judgment explicitly used constitutional morality to decriminalize consensual same-sex acts, emphasizing that individual rights cannot be subjugated by popular morality. Statement 1 is incorrect because while Olga Tellis (1985) linked the right to life with the right to livelihood, it did not mandate permanent housing for all, nor did it explicitly use the term 'constitutional morality' in the modern sense. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Sabarimala judgment (2018) and subsequent discourse actually utilized constitutional morality to prioritize the fundamental rights of women over exclusionary religious practices, rather than arguing that religious practice takes precedence over those rights.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of individual autonomy vs social norms:
1. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment introduced the concept of constitutional morality to define the basic structure of the Constitution, which the court used to limit the individual's autonomy in favor of parliamentary supremacy.
2. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to protect the autonomy of individuals against prevailing social norms.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during the Constituent Assembly debates on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the tyranny of the majority in a nascent democracy.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine to limit parliamentary power, not to promote parliamentary supremacy over individual autonomy. Statement 2 is correct as the Navtej Singh Johar judgment (2018) explicitly defined constitutional morality as a shield for individual rights against majoritarian social morality. Statement 3 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his November 4, 1948 speech, famously emphasized that constitutional morality is essential to prevent the 'tyranny of the majority' and ensure the rule of law in a nascent democracy.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a limit on the amending power of Parliament:
1. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court identified constitutional morality as a counter-majoritarian check on the legislative process.
2. The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976 introduced the term constitutional morality into the Preamble to guide the Parliament in exercising its plenary power of amendment.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during the Constituent Assembly debates on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the tyranny of the majority.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) emphasized that constitutional morality acts as a bulwark against majoritarian impulses, ensuring individual rights prevail over popular sentiment. Statement 3 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, quoting George Grote, famously described constitutional morality in the Constituent Assembly as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution to prevent the tyranny of the majority. Statement 2 is incorrect because the term 'constitutional morality' is not mentioned in the Preamble, and the 42nd Amendment (1976) only added the words 'Socialist', 'Secular', and 'Integrity' to it.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in the interpretation of Fundamental Duties:
1. The 2002 86th Amendment Act added the duty to provide education for children, and legal scholars argue this expansion reflects the evolving nature of Constitutional Morality within the Indian judicial system.
2. The 1950 Constitution, as interpreted in the 1967 Golaknath case, contains implicit provisions that link the concept of Constitutional Morality to the duty of citizens to promote harmony as outlined in Article 51A(e).
3. In the 1997 Vineet Narain case, the Supreme Court held that the principle of Constitutional Morality empowers the state to treat the performance of Fundamental Duties as a condition precedent for the enjoyment of Fundamental Rights.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because while the 86th Amendment added Article 51A(k), Constitutional Morality is a judicial doctrine used to interpret the Constitution's spirit, not a label for legislative expansions of duties. Statement 2 is incorrect as Article 51A was inserted by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, and did not exist in the 1950 Constitution or the 1967 Golaknath judgment. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Supreme Court has consistently held in cases like Minerva Mills that Fundamental Rights and Duties are not interdependent in a way that makes the performance of duties a condition precedent for the enjoyment of rights.
Consider the following statements regarding Relationship between Constitutional Morality and the Basic Structure Doctrine:
1. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar utilized the phrase constitutional morality in his 1948 speech to the Constituent Assembly to describe the process of executive appointments within the colonial administrative framework.
2. The 2015 NJAC judgment declared the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act void, citing that the basic structure doctrine functions as a primary source of law that replaces the text of the Constitution.
3. Justice H.R. Khanna in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case emphasized that the basic structure doctrine serves to preserve the identity of the Constitution, which is intrinsically linked to the underlying values of constitutional morality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct as the Basic Structure Doctrine protects the Constitution's identity, which is rooted in the substantive values of constitutional morality. Statement 1 is incorrect because Dr. Ambedkar, in his 1948 speech, defined constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution to prevent arbitrary executive action, not to describe colonial administrative processes. Statement 2 is incorrect because the NJAC judgment held that the Basic Structure Doctrine acts as a limitation on the amending power under Article 368, not as a source of law that replaces the constitutional text.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a constraint on executive discretion:
1. In the 2016 Nabam Rebia case, the Supreme Court held that the Governor's discretionary power to summon the Legislative Assembly is subject to the limitations imposed by constitutional morality.
2. The 2018 Sabarimala temple entry verdict established that constitutional morality serves as a substantive check on executive and legislative actions that infringe upon individual fundamental rights.
3. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 incorporated the phrase 'constitutional morality' into the Preamble to guide the President in exercising discretionary powers during a national emergency.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
In the Nabam Rebia (2016) case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Governor's discretion is not absolute and must be guided by constitutional morality, while the Sabarimala verdict (2018) explicitly defined constitutional morality as a transformative principle that prioritizes fundamental rights over regressive social customs. Statement 3 is incorrect because the phrase 'constitutional morality' is not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, including the Preamble, and was never introduced by the 42nd Amendment Act.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a tool for judicial review:
1. The Supreme Court in the ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) case applied the principle of constitutional morality to protect the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts during the suspension of fundamental rights.
2. The doctrine of constitutional morality was formally incorporated into the Preamble of the Indian Constitution through the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 to guide the interpretation of the Directive Principles of State Policy.
3. The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) judgment established constitutional morality as a component of the basic structure doctrine, providing the judiciary with the power to strike down constitutional amendments.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the ADM Jabalpur case is infamous for the Court's failure to uphold fundamental rights during the Emergency, not for applying constitutional morality. Statement 2 is incorrect as the doctrine is a judicial innovation derived from the spirit of the Constitution, not an amendment to the Preamble. Statement 3 is incorrect because while the Kesavananda Bharati case established the Basic Structure doctrine, it did not explicitly codify 'constitutional morality' as a specific component of that doctrine, which gained prominence in later judgments like Navtej Singh Johar (2018).
Consider the following statements regarding Distinction between Constitutional Morality and Constitutionalism:
1. Constitutionalism is characterized by the separation of powers as outlined in the 1950 Constitution, while constitutional morality refers to the formal procedures that govern the impeachment of judges under Article 124.
2. The 1946 Objectives Resolution introduced by Jawaharlal Nehru provides the legal foundation for constitutional morality, and it serves as the binding instrument that defines the scope of judicial review in the Indian courts.
3. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the doctrine of basic structure, which functions as the primary legal mechanism for constitutional morality to override the parliamentary amendment process under Article 368.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because constitutional morality is a substantive value-based principle governing the spirit of the Constitution, not merely formal impeachment procedures. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Objectives Resolution, while foundational to the Constitution's philosophy, is not a legally binding instrument that defines the scope of judicial review. Statement 3 is incorrect because while the Basic Structure doctrine limits the amending power under Article 368, it is a judicial interpretation of constitutional limitations rather than a 'legal mechanism' for constitutional morality to override the amendment process.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a limit on the amending power of Parliament:
1. Justice Indu Malhotra, in the Sabarimala temple entry case of 2018, noted that constitutional morality acts as a limitation on religious practices that infringe upon fundamental rights.
2. The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala verdict of 1973 established that the amending power under Article 368 does not extend to the destruction of the basic structure of the Constitution.
3. The Supreme Court in the 2017 Shayara Bano case observed that constitutional morality serves as a guiding principle for interpreting the scope of personal laws within the constitutional framework.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: Justice Indu Malhotra's dissent in the 2018 Sabarimala case emphasized that constitutional morality must balance religious freedom with individual fundamental rights; the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, effectively limiting Parliament's Article 368 amending power; and the 2017 Shayara Bano verdict (Triple Talaq case) utilized constitutional morality to ensure that personal laws remain consistent with the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of secularism and religious freedom:
1. The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) verdict integrated the concept of constitutional morality to protect the fundamental rights of individuals against majoritarian social norms.
2. The Supreme Court of India in the 2018 Sabarimala judgment defined constitutional morality as a governing ideal that transcends the mere adherence to the text of the Constitution.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the Navtej Singh Johar verdict (2018) emphasized constitutional morality to protect individual autonomy against majoritarian morality; the Sabarimala judgment (2018) explicitly defined it as a transformative, governing ideal that goes beyond the mere text of the Constitution to uphold fundamental values; and Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his 1948 speech, famously defined constitutional morality as a 'paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution' to ensure the peaceful evolution of the democratic order.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as an instrument for social engineering and justice:
1. The 2019 Ayodhya verdict refers to constitutional morality as a mechanism for settling land disputes, drawing upon the precedents set in the 1994 S.R. Bommai case.
2. The 1950 Constitution includes a specific preamble clause on constitutional morality, which was inspired by the constitutional traditions of the Irish Free State.
3. The 2018 Sabarimala temple entry verdict utilized the concept of constitutional morality to prioritize individual fundamental rights over long-standing religious practices.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in the 2018 Sabarimala judgment held that constitutional morality overrides social or religious customs when they infringe upon individual fundamental rights. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Ayodhya verdict did not use constitutional morality as the primary mechanism for settling the land dispute, and the S.R. Bommai case (1994) dealt with secularism and federalism, not land title adjudication. Statement 2 is incorrect because the term 'constitutional morality' is not explicitly mentioned in the Preamble of the 1950 Constitution, nor was it borrowed from the Irish Constitution.
Consider the following statements regarding Integration of Constitutional Morality with the Preamble's ideals:
1. The Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment held that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to protect the rights of sexual minorities.
2. The Supreme Court in the A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) case established the doctrine of constitutional morality to invalidate legislative acts that infringed upon the fundamental rights of citizens.
3. The Preamble's commitment to 'Justice, social, economic and political' serves as a foundational pillar for the doctrine of constitutional morality in Indian jurisprudence.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Navtej Singh Johar (2018) verdict explicitly defined constitutional morality as a shield against majoritarian impulses to protect individual autonomy. Statement 3 is correct because the Preamble's ideals of justice and liberty provide the normative framework that informs the application of constitutional morality. Statement 2 is incorrect because the A.K. Gopalan (1950) case actually adopted a narrow, literalist interpretation of the law and did not invoke the doctrine of constitutional morality, which evolved much later in Indian jurisprudence.
Consider the following statements regarding Integration of Constitutional Morality with the Preamble's ideals:
1. In the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case, the judiciary identified the Preamble as an integral part of the Constitution, thereby anchoring constitutional morality within the basic structure.
2. Article 143 of the Constitution provides for the President to seek an advisory opinion on matters of constitutional morality, a power utilized during the 1992 Ayodhya reference to the Supreme Court.
3. The Sabarimala judgment of 2018 emphasized that constitutional morality prevails over social morality, citing Article 25 as a provision that operates within the framework of public order and health.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) established the Preamble as an integral part of the Constitution, forming the bedrock of the basic structure doctrine. Statement 3 is correct because the 2018 Sabarimala verdict explicitly ruled that constitutional morality, rooted in equality and dignity, must supersede exclusionary social or religious practices. Statement 2 is incorrect because Article 143 empowers the President to seek advisory opinions on questions of law or fact of public importance, but it does not specifically designate 'constitutional morality' as a subject, and the 1992 Ayodhya reference was primarily focused on the interpretation of land acquisition and historical facts rather than constitutional morality.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a guide for constitutional interpretation:
1. The 2020 judgment in the case of Kantaru Rajeevaru v. Indian Young Lawyers Association discussed the scope of constitutional morality in balancing individual autonomy with institutional religious practices.
2. Constitutional morality acts as an interpretive tool that allows the judiciary to protect the rights of minorities against the tyranny of the majority, as observed in the 2017 Puttaswamy v. Union of India case.
3. The 1950 Constitution of India incorporated the term 'constitutional morality' into Article 14 during the First Amendment Act of 1951 to provide the judiciary with a specific interpretive framework for equality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court in the Sabarimala review (2020) emphasized that constitutional morality must balance individual fundamental rights with institutional religious practices. Statement 2 is correct because in the Puttaswamy (2017) judgment, the Court utilized constitutional morality to safeguard individual privacy and dignity against majoritarian interference. Statement 3 is incorrect because the term 'constitutional morality' is not explicitly mentioned in the text of Article 14 or anywhere in the Constitution; it is a judicial doctrine derived from the spirit of the Constitution, not an amendment-based provision.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in the interpretation of Fundamental Duties:
1. The Supreme Court in the 2018 Sabarimala judgment identified Constitutional Morality as a tool to balance individual liberty against the collective Fundamental Duties listed under the 1976 amendment.
2. The 1976 Swaran Singh Committee recommended the inclusion of Fundamental Duties, and its report suggests that Constitutional Morality acts as the foundational philosophy for the duty to protect the environment under Article 51A(g).
3. Article 51A(a) refers to the Constitution as a document of national pride, and judicial precedents from the 1980s suggest this clause allows courts to read Constitutional Morality into the duty to respect national institutions.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because Constitutional Morality is primarily a judicial doctrine used to protect individual rights against social dogmas, not a tool to enforce or interpret Fundamental Duties. Statement 1 is false as the Sabarimala judgment used Constitutional Morality to uphold individual rights (Article 25) against exclusionary religious practices, not to balance them against Fundamental Duties. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Swaran Singh Committee report (1976) focused on civic obligations to the State and did not mention Constitutional Morality, a concept that gained prominence in Indian jurisprudence much later. Statement 3 is false because Article 51A(a) mandates respect for the Constitution and national symbols, but there is no judicial precedent from the 1980s that links this specific clause to the interpretation of Constitutional Morality.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a constraint on executive discretion:
1. The Supreme Court in the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment identified constitutional morality as a countervailing force against majoritarian impulses that influence executive decision-making.
2. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment introduced the doctrine of constitutional morality to define the scope of the executive's power to issue ordinances under Article 123.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during the 1948 Constituent Assembly debates, characterized constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the subversion of legal processes by administrative authorities.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Navtej Singh Johar judgment (2018) explicitly defined constitutional morality as a shield against majoritarian social morality that often dictates executive actions. Statement 3 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in the 1948 Constituent Assembly debates, famously described constitutional morality as a 'paramount reverence' for the forms of the Constitution, intended to prevent the subversion of legal processes. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, not the doctrine of constitutional morality, and the latter was not invoked to define the scope of Article 123.
Consider the following statements regarding Distinction between Constitutional Morality and Constitutionalism:
1. Constitutionalism is defined by the existence of a document that limits the powers of the government, whereas constitutional morality refers to the substantive values that guide the interpretation of that document.
2. In the 2017 Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, the court noted that constitutional morality acts as a bridge between the formal text of the Constitution and the evolving aspirations of the citizenry.
3. George Grote, the 19th-century historian, originally coined the term constitutional morality to describe the reverence for the forms of the constitution within a democratic political culture.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as constitutionalism focuses on the structural limitation of power through a legal framework, while constitutional morality provides the normative, value-based lens for interpreting these provisions. Statement 2 is correct because the Supreme Court in the Puttaswamy (Right to Privacy) judgment emphasized that constitutional morality ensures the Constitution remains a living document by aligning its text with contemporary societal values. Statement 3 is correct as the term was indeed coined by George Grote to describe the necessity of a 'paramount reverence' for the forms of the constitution in a democracy, a concept later adopted and adapted by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar for the Indian context.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality and the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism:
1. The concept of constitutional morality was first introduced into the Indian legal lexicon by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar during the 1948 Constituent Assembly debates to justify the inclusion of the Directive Principles of State Policy.
2. Transformative constitutionalism is defined in Article 368 of the Constitution as the process by which the judiciary updates the original intent of the framers to reflect contemporary economic shifts in the global market.
3. The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case established the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism as a primary tool for the legislature to amend the Preamble without violating the basic structure of the Constitution.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Dr. Ambedkar invoked constitutional morality to emphasize the need for administrative adherence to constitutional norms, not specifically to justify the Directive Principles. Statement 2 is false as transformative constitutionalism is a judicial doctrine aimed at using the Constitution to achieve social change and equality, not a provision defined in Article 368. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Kesavananda Bharati case established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine to limit the legislature's amending power, rather than acting as a tool for the legislature to amend the Preamble.
Consider the following statements regarding Ambedkar's interpretation of Constitutional Morality in the Constituent Assembly:
1. Ambedkar highlighted that the lack of constitutional morality in India could lead to the subversion of the democratic framework established by the 1950 Constitution.
2. The interpretation of constitutional morality by Ambedkar serves as a check against the tyranny of the majority in a parliamentary system of governance.
3. Ambedkar's discourse on constitutional morality was situated within the broader context of the 1946-1949 Constituent Assembly deliberations on social and political stability.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a sentiment to be cultivated to prevent the subversion of the democratic framework, emphasizing that forms of government are mere shells without this underlying spirit. His interpretation acts as a safeguard against the 'tyranny of the majority' by ensuring that constitutional provisions are not merely interpreted through legalistic lenses but through the values of justice, liberty, and equality. All three statements are correct as they accurately reflect Ambedkar's discourse during the 1946-1949 Constituent Assembly sessions, where he argued that constitutional morality is essential for maintaining social and political stability in a nascent democracy.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in the interpretation of Fundamental Duties:
1. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 introduced Article 51A, which serves as the primary legal instrument for the judiciary to enforce Constitutional Morality as a binding directive for individual conduct.
2. The Verma Committee Report of 1999 proposed that Constitutional Morality provides the interpretive framework for the Supreme Court to expand the scope of Fundamental Duties beyond the text of Part IV-A.
3. Justice H.R. Khanna in the Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973 linked the concept of Constitutional Morality to the enforcement of Fundamental Duties, suggesting they form a composite duty for citizens.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Fundamental Duties under Article 51A are non-justiciable and not directly enforceable by the judiciary as a binding directive. Statement 2 is false as the Verma Committee (1999) focused on the legal provisions for the implementation of existing duties rather than advocating for judicial expansion beyond the constitutional text. Statement 3 is incorrect because Justice H.R. Khanna's contribution in the Kesavananda Bharati case centered on the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, and he did not link it to the enforcement of Fundamental Duties, which were introduced later by the 42nd Amendment in 1976.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality vs Public Morality in judicial discourse:
1. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment introduced the doctrine of constitutional morality as a foundational pillar for judicial review, and it was later codified in the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act.
2. The concept of constitutional morality was invoked by the Supreme Court in the NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) case to define the functional relationship between the Lieutenant Governor and the elected government.
3. The Supreme Court in the 1994 S.R. Bommai case established constitutional morality as a justiciable right under Article 32, and the 1997 Vishaka guidelines incorporated this principle to regulate workplace conduct.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because in the NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) case, the Supreme Court emphasized constitutional morality to ensure that the Lieutenant Governor and the elected government act in harmony, upholding the spirit of representative democracy. Statement 1 is false because the Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, not the doctrine of constitutional morality, and the latter was never codified in the 42nd Amendment. Statement 3 is false because while S.R. Bommai (1994) dealt with the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356, it did not establish constitutional morality as a justiciable right under Article 32, nor did the Vishaka guidelines explicitly incorporate this principle.
Consider the following statements regarding Evolution of Constitutional Morality in Supreme Court judgments since Kesavananda Bharati:
1. The 1978 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India ruling incorporated constitutional morality into the interpretation of Article 14, specifically focusing on the administrative procedures for passport issuance.
2. The 2019 Sabarimala review petition proceedings saw the Supreme Court define constitutional morality as the adherence to established religious customs that have been practiced for over five hundred years.
3. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala judgment established the basic structure doctrine, which serves as the foundational framework for interpreting constitutional morality within the Indian legal system.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati judgment established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, which acts as the bedrock for constitutional morality by preventing the dilution of core constitutional values. Statement 1 is incorrect because while Maneka Gandhi (1978) expanded the scope of Article 21 and 'due process of law,' it did not explicitly ground its reasoning in the doctrine of 'constitutional morality.' Statement 2 is incorrect because the Supreme Court in the Sabarimala case (2018/2019) explicitly rejected the primacy of age-old religious customs over constitutional morality, asserting that the latter must prevail when customs infringe upon fundamental rights like equality and dignity.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the protection of minority rights:
1. In the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case, the judiciary identified secularism as a core component of the basic structure, safeguarding the rights of religious minorities.
2. The 2017 Puttaswamy judgment established that the protection of individual privacy is a constitutional morality facet that prevents the state from infringing upon minority identities.
3. The National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, provides for the constitution of a body to monitor the working of safeguards provided in the Constitution for the protection of minorities.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the Kesavananda Bharati judgment (1973) established the Basic Structure doctrine, explicitly including secularism to protect religious pluralism. Statement 2 is correct because the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) ruling affirmed privacy as a fundamental right, linking it to constitutional morality to protect individual autonomy against majoritarian or state encroachment. Statement 3 is correct as the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992, was enacted to provide a statutory framework for monitoring the constitutional and legal safeguards designed to protect the interests of notified minority communities.
Consider the following statements regarding Application of Constitutional Morality in Sabarimala and Navtej Singh Johar cases:
1. The Indian Young Lawyers Association filed the writ petition in 2006 that eventually led to the 2018 Supreme Court ruling on the entry of women into the Sabarimala temple.
2. The Sabarimala verdict of 2018 established that the principle of constitutional morality functions as a directive principle of state policy, binding the judiciary to reform all religious trusts registered under the 1951 Act.
3. In the Navtej Singh Johar case, the Court observed that constitutional morality encompasses the protection of individual autonomy and the right to privacy as facets of Article 21.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Indian Young Lawyers Association filed the PIL in 2006, leading to the 2018 Supreme Court judgment that declared the ban on women's entry unconstitutional. Statement 3 is correct because the Navtej Singh Johar verdict emphasized that constitutional morality protects individual autonomy, dignity, and privacy under Article 21, overriding social morality. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Supreme Court did not designate constitutional morality as a Directive Principle of State Policy, nor did the ruling mandate the reform of all religious trusts under the 1951 Act; instead, it clarified that constitutional morality acts as a governing principle to ensure religious practices do not infringe upon fundamental rights.
Consider the following statements regarding Application of Constitutional Morality in Sabarimala and Navtej Singh Johar cases:
1. The concept of constitutional morality was invoked by the Supreme Court to emphasize that the transformative vision of the Constitution takes precedence over existing social norms.
2. In the Navtej Singh Johar case, the Supreme Court held that the decriminalization of Section 377 was based on the 1950 constitutional provision that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
3. Justice Indu Malhotra, in her dissenting opinion in the Sabarimala case, argued that constitutional morality should not be invoked to interfere with the internal religious rituals of a denomination.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Supreme Court used constitutional morality to prioritize fundamental rights over traditional social customs. Statement 3 is correct because Justice Indu Malhotra's dissent emphasized that courts should not interfere in religious practices unless they are clearly exclusionary, maintaining the separation between secular law and religious autonomy. Statement 2 is incorrect because the decriminalization of Section 377 in 2018 was based on the violation of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21, and the Constitution of 1950 does not explicitly list 'sexual orientation' as a prohibited ground for discrimination.
Consider the following statements regarding Role of Constitutional Morality in expanding the scope of Article 21:
1. The 1950 Gopalan case established the initial framework for constitutional morality, providing the legal basis for the Supreme Court to strike down preventive detention laws under Article 21.
2. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case introduced the doctrine of constitutional morality as a formal amendment to Article 21, which allowed the judiciary to review executive actions during the subsequent national emergency.
3. Article 21 was expanded to include the right to a clean environment in the 1991 Subhash Kumar case, a ruling that relied on the Directive Principles of State Policy rather than the doctrine of constitutional morality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 1950 A.K. Gopalan case adopted a narrow 'procedure established by law' interpretation, upholding preventive detention rather than striking it down. Statement 2 is incorrect as the Kesavananda Bharati case established the 'Basic Structure' doctrine, not constitutional morality, and it was not an amendment to Article 21. Statement 3 is incorrect because while the Subhash Kumar case did recognize the right to a clean environment, it did so by interpreting Article 21's 'right to life' as encompassing the quality of life, rather than explicitly excluding the doctrine of constitutional morality.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality and the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism:
1. Constitutional morality is described in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution as a guiding principle for the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States to prevent administrative overreach.
2. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to ensure that the fundamental rights of individuals are protected against the tyranny of social norms.
3. The Supreme Court in the 1973 Maneka Gandhi case linked the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism to the evolution of the Right to Information, noting that transparency is the primary component of constitutional morality.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) emphasized that constitutional morality prevails over societal morality, acting as a safeguard for individual fundamental rights against majoritarian impulses. Statement 1 is incorrect as constitutional morality is a judicial doctrine derived from constitutional interpretation, not a provision listed in the Seventh Schedule. Statement 3 is incorrect because the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism was not linked to the Right to Information in the 1973 Maneka Gandhi case; rather, that landmark judgment expanded the scope of Article 21 and established the 'golden triangle' test for due process.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a tool for judicial review:
1. The principle of constitutional morality was explicitly referenced in the Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) verdict to reinforce the right to privacy as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.
2. Justice Indu Malhotra, in her dissenting opinion in the Sabarimala case, argued that constitutional morality should not be applied to interfere with the internal religious practices of a denomination protected under Article 26.
3. The Supreme Court in the Government of NCT of Delhi v. Union of India (2018) case observed that constitutional morality acts as a check on the exercise of discretionary power by executive authorities.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the Puttaswamy (2017) judgment utilized constitutional morality to establish privacy as a fundamental right; Justice Indu Malhotraâs dissent in the Sabarimala case (2018) emphasized that constitutional morality should not override the essential religious practices protected under Article 26; and the NCT of Delhi (2018) verdict explicitly defined constitutional morality as a safeguard against the arbitrary exercise of discretionary power by the executive, ensuring adherence to democratic values.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality vs Public Morality in judicial discourse:
1. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution.
2. The Supreme Court of India in the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment held that constitutional morality serves as a counter-majoritarian check against popular morality.
3. In the Sabarimala temple entry case (2018), Justice Indu Malhotraâs dissenting opinion argued that constitutional morality should not be invoked to interfere with deeply held religious beliefs.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as Dr. Ambedkar defined constitutional morality as the 'paramount reverence' for constitutional forms during the 1948 Constituent Assembly debates. Statement 2 is correct because the Navtej Singh Johar judgment established that constitutional morality protects individual rights against the 'popular morality' of the majority. Statement 3 is correct as Justice Indu Malhotraâs dissent in the Sabarimala case emphasized that constitutional morality should not be used to override religious practices protected under Article 25 unless they are clearly exclusionary or harmful.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of individual autonomy vs social norms:
1. The 2017 Puttaswamy v. Union of India verdict established that the right to individual autonomy is a core component of Article 21, which serves as a shield against intrusive social and state norms.
2. The 2009 Delhi High Court ruling in Naz Foundation v. NCT of Delhi relied on the 19th-century Victorian social norms to interpret Article 15, arguing that individual autonomy is subject to the historical cultural values of the Indian society.
3. The 1950 Constitution of India contains a specific chapter on constitutional morality, which was drafted by the Constituent Assembly to provide a legal framework for balancing personal liberty with the directive principles of state policy.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the 2017 Puttaswamy judgment affirmed that individual autonomy and privacy are intrinsic to Article 21, protecting citizens from arbitrary state and societal interference. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Naz Foundation ruling actually struck down Section 377, explicitly rejecting Victorian-era morality in favor of constitutional values that protect individual dignity and sexual orientation. Statement 3 is incorrect because the Indian Constitution does not contain a specific chapter on 'constitutional morality'; rather, it is a judicial doctrine evolved by the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution based on its transformative spirit rather than prevailing social prejudices.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the context of secularism and religious freedom:
1. The Supreme Court in the 1954 Shirur Mutt case formulated the doctrine of essential religious practices to define the scope of constitutional morality under Article 26.
2. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 introduced the term constitutional morality into the Preamble to clarify the secular nature of the Indian state.
3. The Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973 established constitutional morality as a specific component of the basic structure doctrine alongside the separation of powers.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the 'essential religious practices' doctrine was indeed formulated in the 1954 Shirur Mutt case, but it pertains to the interpretation of 'religious denomination' under Article 26, not the definition of constitutional morality. Statement 2 is incorrect as the 42nd Amendment added the word 'secular' to the Preamble, but the term 'constitutional morality' does not appear in the Preamble at all. Statement 3 is incorrect because, while the Supreme Court has invoked constitutional morality as a guiding principle in various judgments like Navtej Singh Johar, it was not explicitly established as a specific component of the basic structure doctrine in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati case.
Consider the following statements regarding Evolution of Constitutional Morality in Supreme Court judgments since Kesavananda Bharati:
1. The 2017 Puttaswamy v. Union of India judgment identifies constitutional morality as a direct derivation from the Directive Principles of State Policy, specifically referencing Article 44 regarding a uniform civil code.
2. The 1992 Indra Sawhney v. Union of India verdict introduced the concept of constitutional morality to justify the implementation of the Mandal Commission report and the expansion of reservation quotas.
3. Justice H.R. Khanna in the 1976 ADM Jabalpur case invoked the principle of constitutional morality to argue that the right to life remains protected even during the suspension of fundamental rights.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because they misattribute the origin and application of constitutional morality. In Puttaswamy (2017), the Court linked constitutional morality to the protection of individual liberty and privacy, not the Directive Principles or Article 44; Indra Sawhney (1992) focused on social justice and the 'creamy layer' doctrine rather than constitutional morality; and in ADM Jabalpur (1976), Justice H.R. Khanna famously dissented on the grounds of the rule of law, but the explicit judicial development of 'constitutional morality' as a distinct legal doctrine gained prominence much later, notably in the Navtej Singh Johar (2018) and Sabarimala (2018) judgments.
Consider the following statements regarding Evolution of Constitutional Morality in Supreme Court judgments since Kesavananda Bharati:
1. The 1950 Gopalan v. State of Madras judgment provides the earliest judicial reference to constitutional morality, linking the term to the procedural due process clause found in Article 21.
2. In the 1985 Shah Bano case, the Supreme Court utilized the doctrine of constitutional morality to override personal laws, establishing a uniform standard for maintenance across all religious communities.
3. In the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment, the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality acts as a counter-majoritarian check to protect the rights of individuals against the tyranny of popular sentiment.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 3 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) explicitly defined constitutional morality as a shield against majoritarian impulses, ensuring individual autonomy. Statement 1 is false because the term 'constitutional morality' was not a central judicial doctrine in the 1950 A.K. Gopalan case, which focused on a literal interpretation of 'procedure established by law.' Statement 2 is false because the Shah Bano judgment (1985) was primarily decided under Section 125 of the CrPC regarding secular maintenance laws, rather than invoking the specific doctrine of constitutional morality to override personal laws.
Consider the following statements regarding Relationship between Constitutional Morality and the Basic Structure Doctrine:
1. Constitutional morality traces its origin to the 1950 enactment of the Constitution, where the Drafting Committee included a specific definition of the term in Article 13 to guide judicial interpretation.
2. The Supreme Court in the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar judgment identified constitutional morality as a counter-majoritarian principle that protects the rights of individuals against the tyranny of popular sentiment.
3. The 1973 Kesavananda Bharati verdict established the basic structure doctrine as a codified list of twelve fundamental rights, which the Parliament can amend through a simple majority vote.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct as the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) emphasized that constitutional morality acts as a bulwark against majoritarian impulses, ensuring individual liberty. Statement 1 is incorrect because the term 'constitutional morality' is not defined in the Constitution and is a judicial doctrine evolved through interpretation, not an enactment by the Drafting Committee. Statement 3 is incorrect because the basic structure doctrine is a judicial innovation derived from the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), not a codified list of rights, and it strictly limits the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution's core features regardless of the majority.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality and the doctrine of transformative constitutionalism:
1. Justice H.R. Khanna, in his dissenting opinion in the ADM Jabalpur case, argued that constitutional morality provides the executive with the power to suspend fundamental rights during a period of national emergency.
2. Constitutional morality refers to the legal obligation of the Election Commission of India to ensure that political parties maintain internal democratic processes as outlined in the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
3. The doctrine of transformative constitutionalism originated from the 1994 S.R. Bommai judgment, which focused on the procedural requirements for the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Justice H.R. Khanna's dissent in ADM Jabalpur (1976) famously upheld the sanctity of fundamental rights against executive overreach, rather than justifying their suspension. Statement 2 is incorrect as constitutional morality is a broader normative principle guiding the interpretation of the Constitution to protect substantive values, not a specific legal mandate for the Election Commission to regulate internal party democracy under the RPA, 1951. Statement 3 is incorrect because transformative constitutionalism, as articulated by scholars like Karl Klare, refers to the Constitution's role as a tool for radical social and political change, whereas the S.R. Bommai judgment (1994) primarily dealt with the judicial review of the proclamation of President's Rule under Article 356.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a constraint on executive discretion:
1. The 2017 Puttaswamy judgment linked the concept of constitutional morality to the executive's authority to collect biometric data under the Aadhaar Act of 2016.
2. The 1994 S.R. Bommai case established that the imposition of President's Rule under Article 356 is governed by the principle of constitutional morality as defined in the 1950 Government of India Act.
3. The 1951 Shankari Prasad case utilized the framework of constitutional morality to validate the executive's power to amend fundamental rights through the First Constitutional Amendment.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is incorrect because the Puttaswamy judgment (2017) focused on the right to privacy as a fundamental right, not the specific biometric collection under the Aadhaar Act, which was later challenged in the 2018 Aadhaar judgment. Statement 2 is incorrect as the S.R. Bommai case (1994) invoked the concept of 'constitutional morality' to limit the arbitrary use of Article 356 based on the spirit of the Constitution, not the 1950 Government of India Act (which does not exist; the 1935 Act was the precursor). Statement 3 is incorrect because the Shankari Prasad case (1951) dealt with the validity of the First Amendment under Article 368, and the doctrine of constitutional morality was not a recognized legal framework or judicial tool at that time.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a check on majoritarianism:
1. The Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment identified constitutional morality as a counter-majoritarian tool to protect the rights of sexual minorities.
2. In the Sabarimala Temple case (2018), the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality overrides social morality when the latter infringes upon the fundamental right to equality under Article 14.
3. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the tyranny of the majority.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the Navtej Singh Johar judgment (2018) explicitly used constitutional morality to decriminalize consensual same-sex acts, while the Sabarimala verdict (2018) established that constitutional values like equality must supersede prevailing social or religious customs. Furthermore, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar famously defined constitutional morality in his 1948 speech as a 'governing sentiment' essential to ensure that the rule of law prevails over the potential tyranny of the majority in a democracy.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the functioning of constitutional bodies:
1. The Supreme Court of India in the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment described constitutional morality as a counter-majoritarian check on the legislative process.
2. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, during the Constituent Assembly debates on November 4, 1948, defined constitutional morality as a governing sentiment that prevents the subversion of the rule of law.
3. In the 2018 Sabarimala temple entry case, the majority opinion utilized the doctrine of constitutional morality to prioritize individual fundamental rights over long-standing religious customs.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: the Navtej Singh Johar judgment (2018) established constitutional morality as a safeguard against majoritarian impulses; Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his 1948 Constituent Assembly speech, famously described it as a 'governing sentiment' essential for maintaining the rule of law; and the Sabarimala verdict (2018) explicitly invoked this doctrine to affirm that fundamental rights must prevail over religious practices that violate constitutional values. There are no incorrect statements as each accurately reflects the historical and judicial evolution of the doctrine in the Indian constitutional framework.
Consider the following statements regarding Application of Constitutional Morality in Sabarimala and Navtej Singh Johar cases:
1. In the 2018 Sabarimala judgment, the Supreme Court held that constitutional morality serves as a counter-majoritarian check against exclusionary religious practices.
2. The 2018 Sabarimala judgment relied on the Essential Religious Practices test to determine that constitutional morality is secondary to the provisions of Article 26(b) regarding temple management.
3. The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India verdict of September 2018 utilized the principle of constitutional morality to decriminalize consensual same-sex relations under Section 377.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 3 is correct. Statement 2 is incorrect.
Statement 1 is correct as the Sabarimala verdict emphasized that constitutional morality overrides social or religious norms that violate fundamental rights. Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar (2018) ruled that constitutional morality mandates the protection of individual autonomy and dignity, rendering Section 377 unconstitutional. Statement 2 is incorrect because the court held that constitutional morality takes precedence over the 'Essential Religious Practices' test, affirming that religious freedom under Article 26 cannot be used to justify the exclusion of women in violation of Articles 14 and 15.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality in the protection of minority rights:
1. Article 29 of the Constitution provides for the protection of the interests of minorities, and this provision was originally drafted by the Constituent Assembly to include specific quotas for minority representation in the Rajya Sabha.
2. The 1950 Nehru-Liaquat Pact established a framework for minority protection, and it was incorporated into the Preamble of the Constitution during the 42nd Amendment in 1976.
3. The Minorities Protection Act of 1978 introduced the concept of constitutional morality into the legal lexicon, and it currently serves as the primary statute for defining minority status in India.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 2 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
All three statements are incorrect because Article 29 focuses on cultural and educational rights without providing for Rajya Sabha quotas, the Nehru-Liaquat Pact was a bilateral diplomatic agreement never incorporated into the Preamble, and there is no 'Minorities Protection Act of 1978' as minority status is primarily determined by the Constitution and the National Commission for Minorities Act, 1992. Furthermore, 'Constitutional Morality' is a judicial doctrine evolved by the Supreme Court through various judgments rather than a statutory definition established by any specific act.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a tool for judicial review:
1. The concept of constitutional morality was first invoked by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar in the Constituent Assembly debates on November 4, 1948, to describe the need for a governing spirit beyond the mere letter of the law.
2. The Sabarimala judgment of 2018 identified constitutional morality as a transformative principle that allows the judiciary to examine religious practices against the fundamental rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution.
3. In the Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) judgment, the Supreme Court utilized constitutional morality to decriminalize consensual same-sex relations by emphasizing the protection of individual autonomy.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
All three statements are correct: Dr. B.R. Ambedkar introduced the concept in the 1948 Constituent Assembly debates, emphasizing that constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment but a cultivated one essential for democratic governance. The Sabarimala judgment (2018) explicitly used constitutional morality to prioritize individual fundamental rights over exclusionary religious practices, while the Navtej Singh Johar judgment (2018) utilized the same principle to uphold individual autonomy and dignity, effectively decriminalizing consensual same-sex relations under Section 377 of the IPC.
Consider the following statements regarding Integration of Constitutional Morality with the Preamble's ideals:
1. The Government of India Act, 1935, contains a specific preamble section that outlines the principles of constitutional morality as a guide for the Governor-General in exercising discretionary powers.
2. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution.
3. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 introduced the term 'Constitutional Morality' into the Preamble to provide a legal basis for the exercise of judicial review by the Supreme Court.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 2 is correct. Statement 1 is incorrect. Statement 3 is incorrect.
Statement 2 is correct because Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his November 4, 1948 speech, defined constitutional morality as a 'paramount reverence for the forms of the Constitution,' emphasizing adherence to constitutional procedures. Statement 1 is incorrect as the Government of India Act, 1935, did not contain a preamble or explicit provisions on constitutional morality, and the concept was instead borrowed by Ambedkar from George Grote. Statement 3 is incorrect because the term 'Constitutional Morality' is not explicitly mentioned in the Preamble, and the 42nd Amendment only added the words 'Socialist,' 'Secular,' and 'Integrity' to it.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a guide for constitutional interpretation:
1. Justice Indu Malhotra, in the 2018 Sabarimala temple entry verdict, noted that constitutional morality serves as a counter-weight to social morality and religious traditions.
2. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, described constitutional morality as a sentiment to be cultivated by the people.
3. The Supreme Court of India invoked the principle of constitutional morality in the 2018 Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India judgment to decriminalize consensual homosexual acts.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is incorrect because Justice Indu Malhotra, in her dissent in the Sabarimala verdict, argued that constitutional morality should not be used to override deeply held religious beliefs, unlike the majority view which prioritized it over social traditions. Statement 2 is correct as Dr. B.R. Ambedkar famously defined constitutional morality as a 'sentimental' necessity for the peaceful governance of a democracy, emphasizing that it must be cultivated by the citizenry. Statement 3 is correct because the Supreme Court in the Navtej Singh Johar case explicitly utilized constitutional morality to uphold the rights of the LGBTQ+ community, ruling that personal liberty and dignity transcend archaic social morality.
Consider the following statements regarding Constitutional Morality as a guide for constitutional interpretation:
1. In the 2018 Joseph Shine v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court utilized constitutional morality to strike down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code regarding adultery.
2. The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala judgment of 1973 established the basic structure doctrine, which functions as a foundational pillar for constitutional morality in India.
3. The concept of constitutional morality was famously articulated by George Grote in his 19th-century work, 'A History of Greece', to describe the adherence to democratic norms.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
- Only one
- Only two
- All three
- None
Explanation: Statement 1 is correct. Statement 2 is correct. Statement 3 is correct.
Statement 1 is correct as the SC in Joseph Shine (2018) held that Section 497 violated constitutional morality by treating women as chattel and infringing on their autonomy. Statement 2 is correct because the Basic Structure doctrine acts as a substantive limit on legislative power, embodying the essential values that define constitutional morality. Statement 3 is correct as the term was coined by historian George Grote to describe the necessity of 'reverence' for constitutional restraints in a democracy, a concept later adopted by B.R. Ambedkar to emphasize the need for a culture of adherence to constitutional values over mere legalism.