Assertion Analysis: Nullum Crimen Principle

Assertion (A) states: "Nullum Crimen is an injunction to the legislature not to implicate all the suspected persons to be prosecuted." The core legal principle "Nullum Crimen Sine Lege" means "no crime without law." It mandates that criminal acts must be clearly defined by law before punishment. In the context of this question, Assertion (A) is interpreted to mean that this principle compels legislatures to draft precise laws, thereby preventing overly broad statutes that could potentially incriminate any suspect ('implicate all suspected persons'). Under this interpretation, the assertion holds true.

Reason Analysis: Legislative and Administrative Role

Reason (R) states: "To avoid impossibility and to settle the question, the legislature must have to use administrative ruling." This reason suggests that legislatures utilize administrative rulings as a tool. These rulings help clarify legislative intent, define the scope of laws, and address potential ambiguities or practical challenges ('avoid impossibility'). This process helps in definitively establishing what constitutes a crime ('settle the question').

Relationship Between Assertion and Reason

The principle stated in Assertion (A) requires clear and specific laws. Reason (R) describes a method—the use of administrative rulings—by which legislatures can achieve this necessary clarity. By employing administrative rulings, legislatures can refine legal definitions and prevent the vagueness that might lead to the broad implication of suspects mentioned in Assertion (A). Therefore, Reason (R) serves as a correct explanation for how the legislative framework supports the principle outlined in Assertion (A).

Both statements are considered true in this context, with the reason accurately explaining the assertion.

The correct option is A: Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is correct explanation of (A).