Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Directions: The question below consists of two statements, one labeled as ‘Assertion’ (A) and another as ‘Reason’ (R). Examine these two statements carefully and select the answers to these items from the codes given below.
Assertion (A): It is the legal and constitutional duty of the State to provide legal aid to the poor.
Reason (R): No one should be denied justice by reason of his poverty.
Options
Both A and R are individually true and R is the correct explanation to A
Both A and R are individually true but R is not the correct explanation to A
A is true but R is false
A is false but R is true
Advertisements
Solution
Both A and R are individually true and R is the correct explanation to A
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
One of the reasons for recusal of a Judge is that litigants/the public might entertain a reasonable apprehension about his impartiality. As Lord Chief Justice Hewart said: "It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." And therefore, in order to uphold the credibility of the integrity institution, Judge recuses from hearing the case. A Judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, while assuming Office, takes an oath as prescribed under Schedule III to the Constitution of India, that: "… I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws." Called upon to discharge the duties of the Office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will, it is only desirable, if not proper, that a Judge, for any unavoidable reason like some pecuniary interest, affinity or adversity with the parties in the case, direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the litigation, family directly involved in litigation on the same issue elsewhere, the Judge being aware that he or someone in his immediate family has an interest, financial or otherwise that could have a substantial bearing as a consequence of the decision in the litigation, etc., to recuse himself from the adjudication of a particular matter. No doubt, these examples are not exhaustive. The simple question is, whether the adjudication by the Judge concerned, would cause reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonably informed litigant and fair-minded public as to his impartiality. Being an institution whose hallmark is transparency, it is only proper that the Judge discharging high and noble duties, at least broadly indicate the reasons for recusing from the case so that the litigants or the well-meaning public may not entertain any misunderstanding. Once reasons for recusal are indicated, there will not be any room for attributing any motive for the recusal. To put it differently, it is part of his duty to be accountable to the Constitution by upholding it without fear or favour, affection or ill- will. Therefore, I am of the view that it is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one's oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a Judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case.
Suppose a situation arises where a recusal by a Judge is used as a means to allow a party to choose its own bench, will it be axiomatic from the passage that such recusal is proper, morally or/and constitutionally?
Which of the following Articles of Constitution cannot be amended by a simple majority in both the Houses of Parliament?
Mark the best option:
Article 20(3) of the constitution states ‘No person accused of any offense shall be compelled to be a witness against _________
Given below is the statement of Legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Any institution or body can be a 'State' if it is created under the constitution or a statute, or if it is substantially financed by the Government, or the Government holds its share capital.
FACTUAL STRUCTURAL: K approached the High court by filing a writ petition against the Board for Control of Cricket in India( BCCI). The argument advanced was that BCCI is a 'State, within the meaning of Article 12 of the constitution of India. The question is whether the argument is acceptable?
DECISION:
Parliament has enacted which of the following Legislation in 2015 - 16?
- The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act
- The Election Laws (Amendment) Act
- The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act
- Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act
Which of the following was the first Governor-General of Bengal?
In the question given below are two statements labelled as Assertion (A) and Reason (R). In the context of the two statements, which of the following is correct?
Assertion (A): Vice-President is the member of Rajya Sabha.
Reason (R): Constitution mention the position of Vice-President election.
Which officer of the Government of India has the right to take part in the proceeding of Parliament of India even though he is not a member?
Which article of the constitution of India deals with the special provisions to the state of Arunachal Pradesh?
Which of the following statements, are true regarding the jurisdiction of the High Court?
I. High Court can punish for its contempt.
II. High Court tender advice on the legal question referred to it by the Governor of the State.
III. High Court confirms the death sentences passed by lower judiciary.
IV. High Court can issue writs for enforcement of Fundamental rights.
