Daily Current Affairs Quiz: September 08, 2025

Answer: D [1 and 3 only]
Explanation:

Statement 1 is correct: A constitution serves as a legal framework, safeguarding individual rights against infringement by both governmental entities and private organizations. This ensures that fundamental freedoms, such as speech, assembly, and privacy, are upheld, preventing arbitrary actions that could threaten personal liberties.

Statement 2 is incorrect: While the executive branch often enforces laws and can infringe on rights, violations can occur across all branches of government (legislative, judicial, and executive) through legislation, court decisions, or administrative actions, highlighting the need for checks and balances.

Statement 3 is correct: In a democracy, the government is tasked with protecting citizens’ rights. This responsibility includes preventing any branch of government from overstepping its authority and ensuring that laws and actions respect individual freedoms, thus maintaining a balance of power and upholding democratic principles.

Statement 4 is incorrect: A bill of rights typically establishes and guarantees fundamental rights. While certain rights may be subject to limitations, these limitations must be justified and cannot be modified or suspended arbitrarily by the government.

Answer: A [1, 2 and 3 only]
Explanation:

Statement 1 is correct: Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.” This means that no person can be deprived of their life or personal liberty unless there is a law that authorizes such deprivation. The wording of Article 21 is clear and provides a foundational protection of life and liberty.

Statement 2 is correct: In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court significantly expanded the interpretation of Article 21, ruling that the right to life and personal liberty includes the right to live with human dignity. The court emphasized that life cannot be just about mere survival, but must encompass living with dignity, which is a broad and evolving concept.

Statement 3 is incorrect: The right to privacy was not declared a fundamental right in 1975. It was only in the landmark judgment of K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) that the Supreme Court declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Article 21. In 1975, during the Emergency, the Supreme Court’s approach was restrictive, and the right to privacy was not explicitly recognized in the context of Article 21 at that time. The year 1975 is incorrect here.

Statement 4 is correct: The Supreme Court has recognized that environmental protection is essential for the right to life. In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996) and M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1991), the Court held that a clean and healthy environment is a part of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21. Environmental pollution directly affects the health and life of individuals, and thus the right to a clean and healthy environment is seen as integral to the right to life.

Answer: A [Only one]
Explanation:

Statement 1 is correct: Fundamental Rights are enforceable by the courts, ensuring legal protection for all citizens against any violation of these rights. Article 32 provides the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This judicial protection is one of the distinguishing features of Fundamental Rights.

Statement 2 is incorrect: Fundamental Rights are not absolute. They are subject to reasonable restrictions under certain conditions, as mentioned in the Constitution itself (for example, in Article 19, which guarantees the Right to Freedom, but allows for reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, sovereignty, or decency). Furthermore, Article 359 allows the suspension of Fundamental Rights during a national emergency. Therefore, they can be limited or suspended under specific circumstances.

Statement 3 is incorrect: Most Fundamental Rights apply to both Indian citizens and foreign nationals. For example, Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) is available to all persons, whether citizens or foreigners. However, some rights (like those under Articles 15, 16, 19, and 29) are available only to Indian citizens. Therefore, not all Fundamental Rights are exclusive to Indian citizens.

Answer: C [Only three]
Explanation:

Statement 1 is correct: Justiciable rights refer to rights that can be enforced by the courts. If a person’s right is justiciable, they can approach the courts to seek a remedy if the right is violated. In the Indian Constitution, Fundamental Rights are justiciable because their violation can be directly challenged in courts (such as through a writ petition under Article 32).

Statement 2 is correct: The Right to Education (RTE), as provided under Article 21-A (which was added by the 86th Amendment Act, 2002), is a justiciable right. It mandates that the state must provide free and compulsory education to children between the ages of 6 and 14 years. The violation of this right can be challenged in the court of law, making it justiciable.

Statement 3 is incorrect: Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs), outlined in Part IV of the Indian Constitution, are non-justiciable. This means that they cannot be enforced by a court of law. DPSPs are guidelines or principles for the state to follow in governance, but they are not legally enforceable. Courts cannot directly intervene if the government fails to implement them.

Statement 4 is correct: Fundamental Rights (Part III of the Constitution) are indeed justiciable. They are enforceable by the courts, and any violation can be challenged in a court of law, especially through writs under Article 32 (for the Supreme Court) and Article 226 (for High Courts).

Answer: A [Only one]
Explanation:

Statement 1 is incorrect: In India, parole is granted by the executive authorities (i.e., the state government or prison authorities), not the judiciary. The judiciary may be involved in some cases where it orders parole or gives directions, but the actual granting of parole is typically an administrative decision made by the executive based on the provisions of the Prisoners Act, 1900, and the state-specific parole rules.

Statement 2 is incorrect: Parole is not a matter of right; it is a privilege that can be granted based on specific conditions. Parole is not automatic and is subject to various conditions, including the nature of the offense, the behavior of the prisoner, and the prisoner’s likelihood of re-offending. It can be denied if the authorities believe that granting parole is not in the interest of justice or public safety.

Statement 3 is correct: Parole is granted with the objective of rehabilitating the prisoner and helping in their reintegration into society. Parole allows the prisoner to spend time outside the prison, usually under supervision, to maintain family ties, find employment, and prepare for reintegration into the community. This is in line with the rehabilitative philosophy of prison reform.

Statement 4 is incorrect: While the behavior of the prisoner during incarceration is an important factor in deciding whether to grant parole, it is not the sole consideration. Other factors, such as the nature of the offense, the likelihood of the prisoner committing another crime, and whether the prisoner poses a threat to public safety, are also taken into account. The parole decision may involve a broader assessment of the prisoner’s readiness to reintegrate into society.