Hard Level – GK Questions

Free practice for SSC, UPSC, Banking & Railway exams. No login required.

Showing 1381–1400 of 2061 questions
polity hard Fill in the Blank Navtej Singh Johar Case - Sexual Orientation and Article 15 Navtej Singh Johar sexual orientation critical for UPSC Mains and current affairs exams

In Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court held that discrimination based on sexual orientation violates Article ______, interpreting 'sex' to include sexual orientation, gender identity.

  1. 14
  2. 15
  3. 19
  4. 21
polity hard True/False Joseph Shine Case - Gender Equality and Marital Autonomy Joseph Shine gender equality critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court struck down Section 497 IPC (adultery) as violating gender equality under Articles 14, 15, and dignity/autonomy under Article 21, holding that marital relationships must be based on mutual respect, not ownership.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ Supriyo Case - Judicial Restraint and Legislative Domain Supriyo judicial restraint critical for UPSC Mains and current affairs exams

In Supriyo v. Union of India (2023), the Supreme Court declined to legalize same-sex marriage, exemplifying judicial restraint in policy matters. Which principle best explains this approach?

  1. Courts should always defer to executive discretion
  2. Courts recognize limits of judicial expertise in complex policy design but assert role in protecting constitutional values against legislative/executive excess
  3. Courts have unlimited power to make policy decisions
  4. Courts should avoid all cases involving social issues
polity hard Fill in the Blank Common Cause Case - Passive Euthanasia Safeguards Common Cause passive euthanasia safeguards critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Common Cause v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court recognized passive euthanasia and living wills subject to safeguards including medical board certification, judicial oversight, and ______ committee review to prevent misuse.

  1. political
  2. hospital ethics
  3. family
  4. parliamentary
polity hard True/False NALSA Case - Intersectionality and Transgender Rights NALSA intersectionality critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In NALSA v. Union of India (2014), the Supreme Court recognized that transgender persons face compounded discrimination based on gender identity, caste, class, and directed intersectional approach in policies for transgender welfare, including reservation in education/employment.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ Vishaka Case - Sexual Harassment Guidelines and International Law Vishaka sexual harassment guidelines critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), the Supreme Court laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at workplace. Which international convention primarily informed these guidelines?

  1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
  2. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
  3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
  4. Convention on the Rights of the Child
polity hard Fill in the Blank Chameli Singh Case - Right to Shelter Chameli Singh right to shelter critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Chameli Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1996), the Supreme Court recognized right to shelter as part of right to life under Article 21, holding that shelter includes not just roof over head but adequate living space, safe structure, clean surroundings, and access to ______.

  1. luxury amenities
  2. basic amenities
  3. private security
  4. international standards
polity hard True/False People's Union for Civil Liberties Case - Right to Food PUCL right to food critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India (2001 onwards), the Supreme Court recognized right to food as part of right to life under Article 21, and issued continuing mandamus directions for implementation of food security schemes like PDS, mid-day meals, ICDS.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ P. Ramachandra Rao Case - Speedy Trial and Reasonable Delay P. Ramachandra Rao speedy trial critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka (2002), the Supreme Court clarified the right to speedy trial under Article 21, holding that:

  1. There is a fixed time limit for all criminal trials
  2. No fixed time limit exists; courts must balance nature of offence, reasons for delay, prejudice to parties
  3. Speedy trial applies only to serious offences punishable with life imprisonment
  4. Delay automatically leads to acquittal regardless of circumstances
polity hard Fill in the Blank Francis Coralie Case - Right to Life and Human Dignity Francis Coralie human dignity critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981), the Supreme Court held that right to life under Article 21 means right to live with human dignity, including adequate nutrition, clothing, shelter, and facilities for reading, writing, and expressing oneself.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard True/False Sunil Batra Case - Prison Reforms and Human Dignity Sunil Batra prison reforms critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978, 1980), the Supreme Court recognized that prisoners retain fundamental rights under Article 21, and imprisonment does not mean deprivation of dignity, leading to directions for humane treatment, rehabilitation programs in prisons.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard Fill in the Blank Board of Trustees Case - Right to Livelihood and Regulation Board of Trustees right to livelihood critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Board of Trustees of the Port of Bombay v. Dilipkumar (1983), the Supreme Court held that right to livelihood is part of Article 21, but State can regulate livelihood in public interest with due procedure, illustrating balance between individual rights and ______ welfare.

  1. individual
  2. collective
  3. corporate
  4. international
polity hard True/False Vellore Citizens Case - Sustainable Development Principles Vellore Citizens sustainable development critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India (1996), the Supreme Court recognized sustainable development, precautionary principle, and polluter pays principle as part of environmental law under Article 21, balancing development needs with ecological sustainability.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ Consumer Education Case - Right to Health and Occupational Safety Consumer Education right to health critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India (1995), the Supreme Court recognized right to health as part of Article 21, specifically holding that:

  1. Right to health is absolute and requires immediate universal healthcare
  2. Right to health includes occupational health safeguards for workers, and State must ensure safe working conditions
  3. Right to health applies only to government hospitals, not private healthcare
  4. Right to health is non-justiciable and covered only under Directive Principles
polity hard Fill in the Blank Bandhua Mukti Morcha Case - Bonded Labour and Article 21 Bandhua Mukti Morcha bonded labour critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984), the Supreme Court recognized that bonded labour violates right to life and personal liberty under Article ______, and directed rehabilitation, release of bonded labourers as part of State's positive obligation.

  1. 14
  2. 19
  3. 21
  4. 23
polity hard True/False D.K. Basu Case - Custodial Justice and Procedural Safeguards D.K. Basu custodial justice critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997), the Supreme Court laid down procedural safeguards for arrest, detention to prevent custodial torture, including medical examination of arrestees, recording of arrest details, and production before magistrate within 24 hours.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ Vineet Narain Case - CBI Independence and Judicial Directions Vineet Narain CBI independence critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court issued directions to ensure independence of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) including:

  1. Abolishing CBI and creating new agency
  2. Fixed tenure for CBI Director, insulation from political interference, and supervision by Central Vigilance Commission
  3. Transferring CBI to Supreme Court control
  4. Eliminating CBI's jurisdiction over corruption cases
polity hard Fill in the Blank Suchita Srivastava Case - Reproductive Rights and Autonomy Suchita Srivastava reproductive rights critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Suchita Srivastava v. Chandigarh Administration (2009), the Supreme Court recognized reproductive choices as part of personal liberty, privacy, and dignity under Article ______, affirming women's right to make decisions about pregnancy, childbirth, and family planning.

  1. 14
  2. 19
  3. 21
  4. 25
polity hard True/False Bachan Singh Case - Death Penalty and Rarest of Rare Doctrine Bachan Singh death penalty critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of death penalty but restricted its application to 'rarest of rare' cases, requiring consideration of aggravating and mitigating circumstances before imposing capital punishment.

  1. True
  2. False
polity hard MCQ A.K. Gopalan Case - Narrow Interpretation of Article 21 A.K. Gopalan Article 21 interpretation critical for UPSC Mains and Judiciary exams

In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950), the Supreme Court gave a narrow interpretation to Article 21, holding that 'procedure established by law' means:

  1. Procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable as in American due process
  2. Any procedure prescribed by validly enacted statute, regardless of fairness
  3. Procedure approved by the Supreme Court before implementation
  4. Procedure subject to Parliamentary ratification within 30 days