List I List II (a) K.L.N.V. Veeranjaneyulu vs Union of India and others (i) Women's right to Love and Reject (b) Abhiram Singh vs C.D. Commachen (Dead) by LRS and others (ii) Every author has a fundamental right to speak out ideas freely and express thoughts adequately (c) Pawan Kumar vs State of H.P. (iii) States are not empowered to create office of Parliamentary Secretary (d) Bimolangshu Roy (Dead) through LRS vs State of Assam and others (iv) Seeking vote in the name of religion, caste is corrupt practice
Court Cases Matching Exercise
This question requires matching specific court cases from List I with the corresponding legal principles or rulings from List II. Accurate matching is key to selecting the correct option.
List I Court Cases
- (a) K.L.N.V. Veeranjaneyulu vs Union of India and others
- (b) Abhiram Singh vs C.D. Commachen (Dead) by LRS and others
- (c) Pawan Kumar vs State of H.P.
- (d) Bimolangshu Roy (Dead) through LRS vs State of Assam and others
List II Legal Principles
- (i) Women's right to Love and Reject
- (ii) Every author has a fundamental right to speak out ideas freely and express thoughts adequately
- (iii) States are not empowered to create office of Parliamentary Secretary
- (iv) Seeking vote in the name of religion, caste is corrupt practice
Detailed Matching Analysis
We analyze each item to find its correct match:
| List I Item | List II Item | Brief Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| (a) K.L.N.V. Veeranjaneyulu vs Union of India and others | (ii) Every author has a fundamental right to speak out ideas freely and express thoughts adequately | This case affirmed the fundamental right of authors to express their ideas and thoughts freely. |
| (b) Abhiram Singh vs C.D. Commachen (Dead) by LRS and others | (iv) Seeking vote in the name of religion, caste is corrupt practice | This judgment clearly stated that seeking votes based on religion or caste is a corrupt practice under electoral law. |
| (c) Pawan Kumar vs State of H.P. | (i) Women's right to Love and Reject | This case touches upon personal liberty and autonomy, including the right to choose personal relationships. |
| (d) Bimolangshu Roy (Dead) through LRS vs State of Assam and others | (iii) States are not empowered to create office of Parliamentary Secretary | The Supreme Court ruled that states do not have the power to create the office of Parliamentary Secretary. |
Based on this analysis, the correct matching is:
(a)–(ii), (b)–(iv), (c)–(i), (d)–(iii)
Important Questions from Constitution Law
- Which criteria are used in legislations for treating juveniles differently from young adults?
(a) Physical development
(b) Economic development
(c) Intellectual development
(d) Socio emotional development
Select the most suitable option : - Read Assertion (A) and Reason(R) and answer using the codes given below :
Assertion (A) : The writ of Habeas Corpus can be granted to enable the detainee to argue his case in person.
Reason (R) : Because R Vs. Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Wynne (1992) decided so.
Codes : - Which of the following are matched incorrectly ?
i. Habeas Corpus – ‘To produce the body’
ii. Quo warranto – ‘Issued to a lower court to stop proceedings in a case’.
iii. Prohibition – ‘Issued to a lower court quashing a decision or order’
iv. Mandamus – ‘Commands a person to perform a public duty’. - Read Assertion (A) and Reason (R) to answer using codes given below :
Assertion (A) : One of the two Acts enacted under List I Entry 66 and the other under List III Entry 25 can be repugnant to each other.
Reason (R) : Because in Annamalai University Vs. Secretary of Inf. and Tourism Department decided so.
Codes : - Read Assertion (A) and Reason (R) and answer using the codes given below :
Assertion (A) : The power under 368 of the Constitution is a constituent power subject to the constitutional scheme as to distribution of legislative power according to entries in the Seventh Schedule.
Reason (R) : Because Sasanka Sekhar Maity Vs. Union of India decided so.
Codes :
