Constitutional Law MCQs for Judiciary

Correct answer: B. All citizens only - not foreigners or corporations

Article 19 specifically uses 'all citizens' - the six freedoms are available ONLY to citizens of India. Foreign nationals and corporations cannot claim rights under Article 19. This distinguishes Article 19 from Articles 14, 20 and 21 which use 'person' and apply to everyone. A corporation, being an artificial person, cannot be a citizen and therefore has no Article 19 rights (though its shareholders who are citizens may indirectly be affected).

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: C. Freedom to acquire, hold and dispose of property

The 44th Amendment 1978 deleted Article 19(1)(f) - the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property - and Article 31 (Fundamental Right to property with compensation for acquisition). Property is now governed by Article 300A ('no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law') - a constitutional right but not a Fundamental Right. This means violations of Article 300A cannot be challenged under Article 32 - only under Article 226 (High Court) or ordinary civil suits.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. By legislation or valid delegated law backed by a statute; bare executive orders or administrative circulars are insufficient

A crucial requirement under Article 19 is that restrictions must have the authority of law. The law may be a statute or valid delegated legislation made under a statute, but executive action alone without legislative backing cannot impose restrictions on Article 19 freedoms. An administrative circular or executive notification without a parent law is insufficient. This requirement of legal authorisation is an important check on executive action restricting fundamental freedoms.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: C. Economic security of the State

Article 19(2) lists eight grounds: (1) sovereignty and integrity of India, (2) security of the State, (3) friendly relations with foreign States, (4) public order, (5) decency or morality, (6) contempt of court, (7) defamation, (8) incitement to an offence. 'ECONOMIC SECURITY of the State' is NOT one of them. 'Public health' (which appears in Article 25 for religion) is also NOT in Article 19(2). Knowing the exact eight grounds is essential for exams.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Its terminology ('grossly offensive', 'causing annoyance') was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad - going beyond Article 19(2) grounds and chilling legitimate speech

Section 66A used undefined terms - 'grossly offensive', 'menacing character', 'causing annoyance or inconvenience' - that were susceptible to gross abuse. The Court held: (1) these vague terms went beyond the grounds in Article 19(2) - 'causing annoyance' is not a permissible ground; (2) the terms created a chilling effect on legitimate speech because no citizen could know with certainty what speech would be criminalised; (3) the provision failed the test of reasonableness. The judgment is a landmark for free speech on the internet.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Article 19(1)(a) freedom of speech and Article 19(1)(g) freedom to carry on profession/trade

In Anuradha Bhasin (2020) - the J&K internet shutdown case - the Supreme Court held that freedom of speech and expression through the medium of internet is protected under Article 19(1)(a), and the right to practise any profession or carry on any trade/business using the internet medium is protected under Article 19(1)(g). Internet shutdowns must be proportionate, time-limited, and subject to judicial review. Indefinite or excessive shutdowns violate these fundamental freedoms.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: C. Tata Press Ltd. v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (1995)

In Tata Press Ltd. v. MTNL (1995), the Supreme Court held that commercial speech, including advertising, is part of Article 19(1)(a). The right of a citizen to receive commercial information is also part of this right. The protection is not absolute: deceptive, unfair or misleading advertisements may be regulated under valid law, and speech restrictions must still satisfy constitutional limits. The judgment expanded free-speech doctrine to cover economic expression because advertising is communication, not mere commerce.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: A. Article 19(1)(a) - it is implied in the freedom of speech and expression

The Constitution does not separately mention press freedom. In Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court held that freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) includes freedom of the press - as the press is the primary vehicle for expression. Freedom of circulation is part of freedom of the press - a restriction on circulation is a restriction on speech. Article 19(1)(g) protects the profession of journalism as a business, but the editorial and speech freedom flows from 19(1)(a).

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. The positive right to form associations and the negative right not to be compelled to join one

The right under Article 19(1)(c) has been held to include both the positive right (to form associations) and the negative right (not to be compelled to join an association or union). In Damyanti Naranga v. Union of India (1971), the Court held that the right to form associations also includes the right to continue the association in the form in which it was formed. Compulsory amalgamation into a state-controlled body violates this right.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. The general public or for protection of interests of any Scheduled Tribe

Article 19(5) specifically allows restrictions on movement and residence freedoms in two interests: (1) the general public (wide ground), OR (2) protection of interests of any Scheduled Tribe. The second ground enables legislation preventing non-tribal outsiders from settling in tribal areas - protecting tribal land, culture and livelihoods. This provision recognises that unrestricted migration into tribal regions could harm indigenous communities.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. A person cannot be convicted under a law that was not in force when the alleged offence was committed, or subjected to a greater penalty than prescribed at the time of the offence

Article 20(1) embodies the maxim nulla poena sine lege (no punishment without prior law). It protects against: (1) conviction under a law not in force when the offence was committed; (2) subjecting a person to a penalty greater than what was prescribed when they committed the offence. However, retrospective civil legislation, retrospective procedural changes, or beneficial retrospective criminal law (reducing penalty) are NOT barred by Article 20(1).

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Both prosecuted and punished - not merely prosecuted and acquitted

Article 20(2) - 'No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once' - requires both prosecution and punishment in the prior proceeding. If a person was prosecuted and acquitted, Article 20(2) itself does not apply because there was no punishment. That does not mean a retrial is freely permitted: statutory rules such as Section 300 CrPC and the corresponding BNSS rule may separately embody autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. The exam distinction is that Article 20(2) is narrower than the broader criminal-procedure bar.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. An accused person from being compelled to be a witness against themselves - only in criminal proceedings

Article 20(3) requires: (1) the person must be 'accused of an offence' (not merely a suspect or witness); (2) must be 'compelled' (voluntary confessions are not protected); (3) must be a 'witness against himself' (applies to oral testimony and production of documents - but blood samples, fingerprints, etc. are generally not 'testimony'). In Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010), the Court held narco-analysis violates Article 20(3) as it compels involuntary testimonial disclosure.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: C. National Emergency proclaimed under Article 352

The 44th Constitutional Amendment 1978 inserted clause (1A) in Article 359, expressly providing that Articles 20 and 21 cannot be suspended even during a National Emergency under Article 352. All other fundamental rights (except those in Articles 20 and 21) can be suspended by Presidential Order under Article 359 during National Emergency. This was a direct response to the ADM Jabalpur judgment (1976) where suspension of Article 21 enforcement led to gross rights violations during the 1975 Emergency.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. 24 hours excluding time necessary for journey from place of arrest to Magistrate's court

Article 22(2): 'Every person who is arrested and detained in custody shall be produced before the nearest magistrate within a period of twenty-four hours of such arrest excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the court of the magistrate.' This safeguard applies to all arrests (except preventive detention and enemy aliens). The Magistrate must either release or authorise continued detention. In D.K. Basu (1997), the Court emphasised strict compliance with this requirement.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Can found a constitutional compensation claim for violation of Articles 21 and 22 - the State is liable for custodial violations

In D.K. Basu (1997), Justice A.S. Anand issued mandatory requirements for arresting agencies, including an arrest memo, informing a relative or friend, medical examination, and access to a lawyer during interrogation. Custodial torture and illegal detention violate Articles 21 and 22. The remedy of monetary compensation is granted through Article 32 or Article 226 as a constitutional tort remedy, and the State may be held liable for custodial violations. These guidelines were later partially codified in criminal procedure.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Three months

Article 22(4)(a): No law providing for preventive detention shall authorise detention of a person beyond 3 months unless an Advisory Board consisting of persons qualified to be High Court judges has reported before the expiry of 3 months that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for such detention. This Advisory Board requirement is a key safeguard - without Board recommendation, detention cannot exceed 3 months. Special laws like COFEPOSA and NSA operate within this framework.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Right to be informed of grounds of arrest and right to consult and be defended by a legal practitioner of choice

Article 22(1) provides: (1) No person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest; AND (2) Such person shall not be denied the right to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. These two rights are immediate upon arrest. The right to be informed of grounds is essential to enable the arrested person to seek legal help and challenge detention if unlawful.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Is not accused of any offence - they are detained to prevent future action detrimental to security, public order etc.

Preventive detention allows detention without trial to prevent a person from doing something in the future - it is not punishment for a past act. The person is not an 'accused' of any specific offence. Article 22(3) specifically excludes the safeguards of Article 22(1) and (2) for persons detained under preventive detention laws. The separate safeguards under Article 22(4)-(7) apply - Advisory Board review, communication of grounds, right of representation (but not right to consult a lawyer).

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Article 20(3) and Article 21 - the right against involuntary disclosure and the right to mental privacy

The Supreme Court in Selvi held these three techniques violate both: (1) Article 20(3) - they compel an accused to provide potentially self-incriminating information involuntarily (the subconscious state of the subject during the test makes the disclosure 'compelled'); AND (2) Article 21 - they violate the right to mental privacy, bodily integrity and personal autonomy. Results of these tests cannot be admitted as evidence. Voluntary submission is permissible but the results still cannot be directly used as evidence.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Article 6

Article 6 deals with rights of citizenship of certain persons who migrated to India from Pakistan. Such persons can be citizens if: they or their parents/grandparents were born in India as defined in the GoI Act 1935, AND either they migrated before 19 July 1948 (with domicile in India), or they migrated after 19 July 1948 and registered as a citizen. The cut-off date of 19 July 1948 is frequently tested.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Shall not be a citizen of India - Indian citizenship is automatically lost

Article 9 provides that a person who has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State is NOT a citizen of India or deemed to be a citizen of India. India does not permit dual citizenship for ordinary citizens (OCI is not full citizenship). Voluntary acquisition of foreign nationality automatically terminates Indian citizenship. This is different from involuntary loss of citizenship.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: D. Muslims

The CAA 2019 provides a pathway to citizenship for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, Parsis and Christians from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan who entered India before 31 December 2014 and faced religious persecution. Muslims are excluded. The constitutional challenge to CAA is pending before the Supreme Court. The government's position is that Muslims cannot be persecuted minorities in these majority-Muslim countries.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. At least one parent is a citizen and neither parent is an illegal migrant

After the 2003 Amendment to the Citizenship Act, India moved away from pure jus soli (citizenship by place of birth alone). A person born in India after 3 December 2004 is a citizen only if: (1) at least one parent is an Indian citizen; AND (2) neither parent is an illegal migrant. If either parent is an illegal migrant, citizenship by birth is denied regardless of where the child is born.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References

Correct answer: B. Plenary - Parliament can make any provision on acquisition and termination of citizenship including retrospective laws

Article 11 expressly provides: 'Nothing in the foregoing provisions of this Part shall derogate from the power of Parliament to make any provision with respect to the acquisition and termination of citizenship and all other matters relating to citizenship.' This is a plenary grant of power - Parliament can make any law on citizenship, prospectively or retrospectively. The Citizenship Act 1955 is enacted under this power.

Source note: MP Jain Constitutional Law / Standard References