16 June 2023 Static Quiz

Answer: c
Explanation:
•The Indian Independence Act of 1947 ended British rule in India and declared India as an independent and sovereign state from August 15, 1947. Jawaharlal Nehru was the first Prime Minister of India and was appointed by the Governor General Mountbatten. Jawaharlal Nehru was the Vice-President of the Interim Government formed in 1946. He headed the first Cabinet and held portfolios like External Affairs & Commonwealth Relations; Scientific Research.
•Jawaharlal Nehru was again re-elected as the Prime Minister after the first general election based on universal adult franchise that was held in 1951-52.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.

Answer: d
Explanation:
•The Bar Council of India (BCI) has framed rules named ‘Bar Council of India Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2022’. The BCI was established by Parliament under the Advocates Act, 1961, on the recommendations of the All-India Bar Committee 1951.
•According to Rule 8 of the above rules, foreign lawyers or foreign law firms registered under these rules shall not be permitted to practise Indian law before any courts, tribunals, or other statutory or regulatory authorities. They shall be allowed to practice transactional work/corporate work such as joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions, intellectual property matters, drafting of contracts, practice law in India in non-litigious matters and other related matters on a reciprocal basis. They shall not be involved or permitted to do any work pertaining to the conveyancing of property, title investigation or other similar works. So, statement 1 is correct.
– As per Rule 12, the BCI has the right to issue directions and regulations from time to time which are necessary for the proper working of the foreign law firms in India. The BCI may hold deliberations and consultations with its counterparts i.e., statutory authorities in the regulation of the legal profession in different foreign countries in consultations with the Government of India. So, statement 2 is correct.
•An Advocate who is enrolled with any State Bar Council in India and is a partner or associate in any foreign law firm registered in India can take up only non-litigious matters. S/He can advise on issues relating to countries other than the Indian laws only. Such a lawyer shall have no advantage/right of his being an advocate enrolled in India. So, statement 3 is correct.
Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Answer: c
Explanation:
•The non-justiciable nature of a provision means that it is not enforceable by the courts for their violation.
•Fundamental Rights are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution from Articles 12 to 35. Article 32 declares that these rights are justiciable, allowing persons to move the courts for their enforcement, if and when they are violated. These are:
» Right to equality, including equality before law, prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth, and equality of opportunity in matters of employment. So, point 1 is not correct.
» Right to freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association or union, movement, residence, and right to practice any profession or occupation (some of these rights are subject to security of the State, friendly relations with foreign countries, public order, decency or morality). So, point 2 is not correct.
» Right against exploitation, prohibiting all forms of forced labour, child labour and traffic in human beings.
» Right to freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion. So, point 4 is not correct.
» Right of any section of citizens to conserve their culture, language or script, and right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice; and
» Right to constitutional remedies for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
•Article 37 of the Constitution of India declares that the provisions contained in Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy) shall not be legally enforceable by the courts for their violation. Therefore, the government (Central, State and local) cannot be compelled to implement them. The right to adequate means of livelihood for all citizens is given in Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 39 of the Constitution. Thus, it is non-justiciable in nature. So, point 3 is correct.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.
Relevance: The Supreme Court has recently ruled that Fundamental Right under Article 19 can be enforced even against private citizens, thus expanding its ambit.

Answer: d
Explanation:
•Original jurisdiction means the power to hear the disputes in the first instance and not by way of appeal. In the following federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original jurisdiction under Article 131 of the Constitution of India. It means that it is the whole and sole authority to hear and determine the case and that no other court has the power.:
–Between the Centre and one or more States.
–Between the Centre and any State or States on one side and one or more other States on the other side.
–Between two or more States.
•Further, this original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend to the following: – Inter-state water disputes.
–A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or other similar instrument.
–Matters referred to the Finance Commission
•Both the Supreme Court and High Courts have powers to interpret the Constitution. So, it is not the exclusive original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Under Article 132, if there is a High Court judgment, decree, or order on any civil or criminal proceeding, that involves a substantial question regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, there shall be an appeal to the Supreme Court.
•Similarly, under Article 228, if the High Court is satisfied that a case pending in a court subordinate to it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution the determination of which is necessary for the disposal of the case, then it has the power to withdraw the case and dispose of the case itself. Otherwise, it can determine the said question of law and return the case to the court from which the case has been so withdrawn together with a copy of its judgment. Therefore, option (d) is the correct answer.

Answer: c
Explanation:
•The Indian Penal Code, 1860 under Section 499 (and not the Constitution of India) defines the term defamation and its exceptions. According to it, defamation arises when a person makes or publishes any wrong or false statement or allegation or false imputation related to any person, by words or in oral or by signs or in any form it is said to defame that person. A defamation can be a civil or a criminal offence. So, statement 1 is not correct.
•Defamation is an offence under both civil and criminal law. In civil law, defamation is punishable under the Law of Torts by imposing punishment in the form of damages to be awarded to the claimant. Under the Criminal law, defamation is a bailable, non-cognizable offence and compoundable offence. Hence, a policeman may arrest only with an arrest warrant issued by a magistrate. The Indian Penal Code punishes the offence with a simple imprisonment up to two years, or with fine or both.
•In India, the time limit to file civil defamation is 1 year from the date of the event and in case of criminal defamation, it is 3 years from the date of the event. So, statement 2 is not correct.
•Article 19 of the Constitution of India has granted various freedoms to its citizens. However, Article 19(2) has imposed reasonable restrictions to Freedom of Speech and Expression granted under Article 19(1) (a). These are security and sovereignty of India, friendly relations with Foreign States, public order, decency or morality in the relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence. So, statement 3 is correct.
•Under Article 105, no Member of Parliament (MP) shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of any thing said or any vote given by him in Parliament or any Parliamentary committee. MPs are exempted from any legal action for any statement made or act done in the course of their duties. Thus, a defamation suit cannot be filed for a statement made in the House. So, statement 4 is correct.
Therefore, option (c) is the correct answer.
Relevance: Recently, a Member of Parliament was disqualified from the Parliament due to his conviction in a Defamation case.