The Supreme Court — MCQs with Answers (Set 2)

The Court traced seven sub-rights: notice, hearing, reasoned decision, public purpose, fair compensation, efficient process and conclusion.

Gopalan was decided on 19 May 1950. The majority upheld the Act, except section 14.

The words stopping courts from questioning whether a law gave effect to the policy were struck down.

The Board is a registered society, not a statutory body.

The Court did not find pervasive State control, and public duty alone is not enough.

A five-judge Bench held in 1967 that authorities created by statute with governmental powers are covered.

The *ejusdem generis* rule was rejected.

In Kehar Singh (16 December 1988) the Court held the President may scrutinise the record afresh.

This is not an appeal against the court.

Article 32(1) guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings.

The right is itself a Fundamental Right.

The petitioners conceded in the High Court that they could not claim a Fundamental Right to put up huts on pavements.

The Supreme Court said this concession could not create an estoppel against them.

The Court respectfully declined to answer the Ayodhya reference and returned it. The pending suits were revived.

Clause (1) says the Court “may” report its opinion. It is advice, not a judgment in a case.

The Court said Article 355 is not an independent source of power. It justifies the measures taken under Articles 356 and 357.

The Constitution Bench upheld Article 21A and the Act.

It held that the Act, applied to minority schools, aided or unaided, is ultra vires Article 30(1).

So those schools stay outside the Act.

The Court held that the right to free education up to 14 years is a fundamental right.

After that, the right depends on the State’s economic capacity and development.

Immunity covers all powers and duties but not review for mala fides or ultra vires.

The Court held that the Sea Customs authorities are not a judicial tribunal.

So confiscation by them could not support a plea of double jeopardy.

A later criminal prosecution was therefore not barred.

The Supreme Court held there was no infringement of Article 20(3).

This covers specimen handwriting, signature and impressions of thumb, fingers, palm or foot.

The samples are taken for comparison.

Article 145 lets the Court make rules on practice and procedure, including review and its time limits.

Article 137 gives the Supreme Court power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it.

The five-judge Bench held that deemed assent does not exist and courts cannot impose timelines.

A five-judge Bench unanimously struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code in Joseph Shine v Union of India. Adultery stopped being a crime.

The five-judge Bench unanimously held there is no fundamental right to marry. It left the question of same-sex marriage to Parliament.

The Court held that the consent of the family, community or clan is not necessary once two adults agree to marry. It also called ill-treatment in the name of honour illegal.

The Court held that the 1092 Act stood wholly repealed when the 1925 Act was extended in 1951. A 2009 Kerala High Court case repeats this.