Judiciary MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Judiciary - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is Indra Sawhney v. Union of India.

Key Points

• Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992), also known as the Mandal Commission case, is a landmark judgment of the Supreme Court of India.
• The case upheld the constitutionality of providing 27% reservations for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) in government jobs and educational institutions.
• The judgment introduced the concept of the "creamy layer" within OBCs, excluding socially and economically advanced individuals from reservation benefits.
• The Supreme Court also emphasized that reservations should not exceed 50% of the total seats in any institution or job category, barring extraordinary circumstances.
• While the case did not mandate the formation of the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC), it laid the foundation for ensuring equitable representation for socially and educationally backward classes.

Additional Information

• Creamy Layer Concept: The "creamy layer" refers to relatively wealthier and more privileged members within the OBC category who are excluded from availing reservation benefits. This ensures that benefits reach the truly disadvantaged sections.
• 50% Reservation Cap: The Supreme Court ruled that reservations across all categories (SC, ST, and OBC) should not exceed 50% of the total available seats or positions to maintain the principle of equality.
• Mandal Commission: The Second Backward Classes Commission, chaired by B.P. Mandal, recommended 27% reservations for OBCs in central government jobs and educational institutions. Its report formed the basis of the case.
• Judicial Review: The judgment in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India affirmed that reservation policies are subject to judicial review to ensure compliance with constitutional principles.
• Impact: The case strengthened affirmative action policies in India while introducing safeguards to prevent misuse of reservation benefits, thus balancing social justice with meritocracy.

The correct answer is ancient Indian dispute resolution.

Key Points

• Lok Adalat is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism inspired by the ancient Indian system of dispute resolution, which emphasized amicable settlement of conflicts through dialogue and consensus.
• The concept is rooted in traditional practices such as panchayats and public assemblies where disputes were resolved by community leaders or elders.
• The modern Lok Adalat system was institutionalized in India under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to provide an informal and cost-effective mechanism for dispute resolution.
• Lok Adalats are organized by National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) and State Legal Services Authorities to ensure justice is accessible to all, especially marginalized communities.
• These courts have the power to resolve cases related to civil disputes, matrimonial issues, and compoundable criminal cases, with decisions being legally binding on the parties.

Additional Information

• Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
  • This Act provides the framework for the establishment of Lok Adalats across India.
  • Under the Act, awards made by Lok Adalats are final, binding, and enforceable as decrees of a civil court.
  • The Act aims to ensure free legal aid and promote justice for weaker sections of society.
• Key Features of Lok Adalat
  • Cases resolved in Lok Adalats are settled amicably without any lengthy litigation process.
  • Parties are not required to pay court fees, and if a case is settled in Lok Adalat, the court fee paid earlier is refunded.
  • These courts are known for their simplicity and speedy resolution of disputes.
• Panchayat System in Ancient India
  • In ancient India, village-level panchayats were responsible for resolving disputes through collective wisdom and consensus.
  • Panchayats emphasized fairness, impartiality, and community welfare in their decisions.
• Role of National Legal Services Authority (NALSA)
  • NALSA was constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act to oversee and implement legal services programs across India.
  • It plays a key role in organizing Lok Adalats and ensuring justice delivery to underprivileged groups.

The Correct answer is To protect the supremacy of the Constitution and fundamental rights.

Key Points

• Judicial review in India ensures the protection of the supremacy of the Constitution, which is the highest law of the land.
• It is a mechanism for safeguarding fundamental rights, as guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution, against legislative and executive actions.
• The judiciary has the authority to review the actions and decisions of the legislature and executive to ensure they do not violate the Constitutional provisions.
• Judicial review enables the courts to declare laws or actions null and void if they are inconsistent with the Constitution.
• It upholds the principle of constitutional morality, ensuring that all laws and policies align with the values and principles enshrined in the Constitution.
• This process helps maintain the balance between the various organs of the government, preventing any one organ from exceeding its powers.
• Judicial review is crucial in a democracy like India, where the judiciary acts as the guardian of the Constitution and the rights of citizens.
• The concept finds its roots in Articles 13, 32, and 226 of the Indian Constitution, which empower the judiciary to review laws and protect fundamental rights.
• It is especially significant in cases involving the violation of rights such as freedom of speech, equality, and personal liberty.

 Additional Information

•  To allow the judiciary to make laws
  • The judiciary does not have the power to legislate; its role is limited to interpreting and applying the law as per the Constitution.
  • Law-making is the exclusive domain of the legislature in India, as per the separation of powers principle.
  • Judicial review does not involve creating laws but reviewing them for Constitutional validity.
• To maintain federal balance between Centre and States
  • While judicial review does play a role in resolving disputes between the Centre and States, this is not its primary purpose.
  • Federal balance is maintained through mechanisms like the Finance Commission and specific provisions in the Constitution, such as Article 246, detailing the division of legislative powers.
• To ensure the supremacy of the Parliament
  • In India, the Constitution, not the Parliament, is supreme, unlike in the UK where parliamentary sovereignty exists.
  • The judiciary reviews parliamentary laws to ensure they align with the Constitutional framework.
  • Judicial review acts as a check on parliamentary supremacy, ensuring that laws do not violate fundamental rights.

The Correct answer is Only 1.

Key Points

• The 'Gorakhnath Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh' case was a significant legal ruling by the Chhattisgarh High Court in February 2025.
• The case involved allegations of brutal non-consensual sexual assault by a husband on his wife, which led to her tragic death.
• The court's decision highlighted the importance of recognizing marital rape as a criminal offense, emphasizing the need for justice and protection for spouses.
• In this case, the husband was convicted and awarded the maximum punishment for rape under the provisions of the law.
• The judgment is regarded as a landmark ruling in the context of addressing gender-based violence and upholding women's rights in marriage.
• This case has also fueled debates over the need for more explicit legal recognition of marital rape as a criminal offense in India.

 Additional Information

• Key Takeaways from the Case
  • The judgment underscores the importance of addressing domestic violence and marital abuse in India.
  • It sets a precedent for future cases involving marital rape, pushing for its explicit criminalization in Indian laws.
  • The case also brings attention to the need for legal reforms to strengthen women's safety and spousal rights.

The Correct answer is Protection of Fundamental Rights.

Key Points

• The phrase "sentinel on the qui vive" was used by the Supreme Court of India to describe its role as the guardian of the Fundamental Rights enshrined in the Constitution of India.
• The term "qui vive" means "on alert" or "on guard," symbolizing the Supreme Court’s vigilant role in ensuring that the rights guaranteed to citizens are not infringed by the state or any other entity.
• Under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, individuals have the right to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights.
• The Supreme Court has the power to issue five types of writs (Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warranto) to protect these rights.
• Fundamental Rights are outlined in Part III of the Indian Constitution and include rights such as the Right to Equality (Articles 14-18), Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22), Right against Exploitation, and others.
• The judiciary acts as the final interpreter of the Constitution, ensuring that laws passed by the legislature and actions taken by the executive conform to the principles of the Constitution.
• The concept of judicial review allows the Supreme Court to strike down unconstitutional laws or actions that violate Fundamental Rights.

 Additional Information

•  Protection of foreign policy
  • The Supreme Court does not directly deal with the protection of foreign policy. Matters related to foreign policy fall under the purview of the executive branch, specifically the Ministry of External Affairs.
  • However, the judiciary can intervene if the implementation of foreign policy violates the Constitution or Fundamental Rights.
• Protection of legislative privileges
  • Legislative privileges refer to the special rights and immunities enjoyed by members of the legislature, as specified in Article 105 for Parliament and Article 194 for State Legislatures.
  • The judiciary generally does not interfere in legislative privileges unless there is a violation of Fundamental Rights or constitutional limits.
• Protection of tax laws
  • The protection of tax laws falls under the purview of the legislature and executive. The judiciary may review tax laws to ensure that they comply with the Constitution and do not violate Fundamental Rights.
  • For instance, if a tax law discriminates unfairly, it may be challenged under the Right to Equality (Article 14).

The correct answer is Article 71.

Key Points

• Article 71 of the Indian Constitution states that all doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of a President or Vice-President shall be inquired into and decided by the Supreme Court.
• This provision ensures that the Supreme Court has the final authority in resolving any issues related to the election of these high offices, maintaining the integrity of the electoral process.
• The mechanism provided in Article 71 helps prevent any political ambiguity regarding the election outcomes, thereby strengthening public trust in the electoral system.
• The Supreme Court of India is the apex court of the Indian judicial system.

Additional Information

• Article 69 deals with the Oath or affirmation by the Vice-President.
• Article 70 discusses the circumstances under which the President can continue in office despite the vacancy.
• Article 68 Time of holding election to fill vacancy in the office of Vice President and the term of office of person elected to fill casual vacancy
• Article 66 deals with the election of the Vice-President.
• Article 54 of the Constitution of India is about the election of the President of India.
• Article 55 of the Indian Constitution outlines the manner of election of the President of India.

The correct answer is Article 32.

Key Points:

• Article 32 provides the right to Constitutional remedies which means that a person has the right to move to Supreme Court (and high courts also) for getting his fundamental rights protected. While the Supreme Court has the power to issue writs under Article 32, High Courts have been given the same powers under Article 226.

Important Points:

• Mandamus means "a command" which is issued by the court to enforce fundamental rights whenever a public officer or a government representative has committed an act of violating a person’s fundamental rights.
• Habeas Corpus means “to produce the body”  which is issued to let the court know the grounds of confinement. This protects an individual's Liberty.
• Quo Warranto means "By what authority". It is issued by the court to enquire into the legality of a claim which a person asserts to public office. This writ enables the public to see that a public office is not usurped.
• Certiorari means "to be certified". It is issued to a Lower court after a case has been decided by it, quashing the decision or order by the High court or Supreme court. It ensures that the jurisdiction of an inferior Court or Tribunal is properly exercised.

 Additional Information

The correct answer is Harilal J. Kania.

Key Points

• Harilal Jekisundas Kania was the first Chief Justice of India.
  • He was the Chief Justice of India from 1950 to 1951.
  • He read the oath of chief justice of India to Dr Rajendra Prasad(India's first President).
  • H. J. Kania served as acting editor of the Indian Law Reports.
  • Mandakolathur Patanjali Sastri was the second Chief Justice of India.
  • Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan was the third Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India.
  • Sudhi Ranjan Das (S.R. Das) was the 5th Chief Justice of India.

The Correct Answer is Kerala.

Key Points

• Kerala's High Court has jurisdiction over Lakshadweep. A Munsiff Court is located in Andrott, and it has jurisdiction over the islands of Kavaratti, Andrott, Minicoy, and Kalpeni.
• Another Munsiff Court is located in Amini, and it has jurisdiction over the islands of Amini, Agatti, Kadmat, Kiltan, Chetlat, and Bitra.
• For the jurisdictions in question, these courts often serve as Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class.
• The Chief Judicial Magistrate's charge is held by the Judicial Magistrate in Andrott.
• With effect from April 1997, the Kavaratti Sub Court was elevated to the status of District and Sessions Court.

Important Points

• Bombay High Court: The high court's jurisdiction extends to the states of Goa and Maharashtra, as well as the Union Territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu.
• Calcutta High Court: West Bengal and the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands are under the jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court. 
• Madras High Court: Tamil Nadu and the Union Territory of Puducherry are under the jurisdiction of the High Court. 
• Gauhati High Court: Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, and Nagaland are the four states that the High Court has jurisdiction over. 
• Kerala High Court: Kerala and the Union Territory of Lakshadweep are under the jurisdiction of the High Court. 
• Punjab and Haryana High Court: Punjab and Haryana, as well as the Union Territory of Chandigarh, are under the jurisdiction of the High Court.

Additional Information

•  Lakshadweep:
  • Formation: 1 November 1956
  • Capital: Kavaratti Government
  • Administrator: Praful Khoda Patel
  • MP: Mohammed Faizal P. P. (NCP)

The correct answer is President or some person appointed by him.

Important Points

Oath or Affirmation

• A person appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court, before entering upon his office, has to make and subscribe an oath or affirmation before the President, or some person appointed by him for this purpose. Hence, option 2 is correct.
• In his oath, a judge of the Supreme Court swears:
  1. to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India;
  2. to uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India;
  3. to duly and faithfully and to the best of his ability, knowledge and judgement perform the duties of the Office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will; and
  4. to uphold the Constitution and the laws.

Additional Information

Qualifications of Judges

• A person to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court should have the following qualifications:
  1. He should be a citizen of India.
  2. He should have been a judge of a High Court (or high courts in succession) for five years; or
  3. He should have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in succession) for ten years; or
  4. He should be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the president.

From the above, it is clear that the Constitution has not prescribed minimum age for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court.

The correct answer is Calcutta High court.

Key Points

• Calcutta High court is the oldest high court in India, it was established in the year 1862.
• In the same year, Bombay and Madras High court were established.
• Bombay, Madras, and Calcutta are the three chartered high courts in India.
• There are currently twenty-five high courts in India as of September-2020.
• Telangana and the Andhra Pradesh high courts are the newly-formed high courts of India, which were formed in the year 2019.
• Barnes Peacock was the first chief justice of the Calcutta High court, which assumed charge on 1 July 1862.
• Sir Mathew Richard Sausse was the first chief justice of the Bombay High court.

The correct answer is 26th January 1950.

Key Points

• The Supreme Court in India was established under the Regulating Act, of 1773.
• The Regulating Act of 1773 established a Supreme Court at Fort William, Calcutta.
• Harilal Jekisundas Kania was the first Chief Justice of India.
• The Supreme Court came into existence on 26 January 1950 with the coming into force of the Constitution. The Supreme Court initially functioned from the old Parliament House till it moved to the present building located on Tilak Marg, New Delhi in 1958.
• On 28 January 1950, two days after India became a Sovereign Democratic Republic, the Supreme Court was inaugurated. The inauguration took place in the Chamber of Princes in the old Parliament building where the Federal Court of India sat for 12 years from 1937 to 1950.
• The inauguration took place in the Chamber of Princes in the Parliament building which also housed India's Parliament, consisting of the Council of States and the House of the People.
• In the Chamber of Princes, the Federal Court of India had sat for 12 years between 1937 and 1950.
• This was to be the home of the Supreme Court for years that were to follow until the Supreme Court acquired its own present premises.
• It replaced both the Federal Court of India and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.
• The First proceedings took place on 28 January 1950 at 9:45 am.​

​Confusion PointsPlease go through this Official Link for a better understanding.

Link: https://bit.ly/2UuGyOB

The correct answer is the President of India in consultation with senior judges of Supreme Court and High Court

• The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is appointed by the President of India under clause (2) of Article 124 of the Constitution.
• The chief justice is appointed by the president after consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and high courts as he deems necessary.
• The other judges are appointed by the president after consultation with the chief justice and such other judges of the Supreme Court and the high courts as he deems necessary. The consultation with the chief justice is obligatory in the case of the appointment of a judge other than Chief justice.
• The basic procedure to be followed for the appointment of CJI is:
  • Appointment to the office of the Chief Justice of India should be of the senior-most Judge of the Supreme Court considered fit to hold the office.
  • The Union Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs would, at the appropriate time, seek the recommendation of the outgoing Chief Justice of India for the appointment of the next Chief Justice of India.
  • Whenever there is any doubt about the fitness of the senior-most Judge to hold the office of the Chief Justice of India, consultation with other Judges as envisaged in Article 124 (2) of the Constitution would be made for the appointment of the next Chief Justice of India.
  • After receipt of the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India, the Union Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs will put up the recommendation to the Prime Minister who will advise the President in the matter of appointment. 

The correct answer is Kolkata.

Key Points

• The first high court of India was established in Kolkata.
• It was formerly called the High Court of Judicature at Fort William.
• It was issued under the Indian High Courts Act 1861.
• It was formally opened on 1 July 1862.
• Sir Barnes Peacock as its first Chief Justice of the Calcutta High Court.
• Justice Sumboo Nath Pandit was the first Indian to assume office as a Judge of the Calcutta High Court.

Additional Information

• The Chief Justice of the High Court is appointed by the President.
• Every high court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other Judges as the President may decide.
• Judges of the High Courts are removed by the President on the same grounds and manner as the judges of the Supreme Court are removed.
• The oath and affirmation to the judges of the High Court are administered by the Governor of the State.
• A judge of the High Court can resign his office by writing to the President.

The correct answer is The Governor of the state.

• The Governor of the state administers the oath of office to a judge of a high court.

Key Points

• Governor of the state:
  • The term of office of the Governor is five years from the date when he enters the office.
  • However, his term of five years is subject to the pleasure of the President.
  • His oath is administered by the Chief Justice of the concerned State High Court and in his absence, the seniormost Judge of that Court.
  • The 7th Constitutional Amendment Act, of 1956 facilitated the appointment of the same person as the governor for two or more states.
  • The Constitution prescribes two qualifications for the appointment of a person as governor.
    • He has to be a citizen of India.
    • He should have completed the age of 35 years.
  • The Governor acts as the Chancellor of the State Universities and also appoints the vice-chancellor of the universities in the state.
  • He administers the oath to the judge of the High Court.
• A judge of the high court is appointed by the President of India with the consultation of the chief justice of India and governor of the state.
• A judge of high court can be removed by order of the President