MCQ 28 Dec 2023

Daily practice questions for CLAT - (28 December 2023)



The Indian Constitution, a monumental document that underpins the world's largest democracy, enshrines a plethora of rights to its citizens. Central to these rights is the provision for constitutional remedies, ensuring that these rights are not merely ornamental but are enforceable and actionable. These remedies, primarily provided under Articles 32 and 226, act as the judiciary's tools to safeguard citizens' fundamental rights against any potential infringement. The primary vehicle for enforcing fundamental rights at the national level is Article 32, which empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of rights. On the other hand, Article 226 confers similar powers upon the High Courts but extends their jurisdiction beyond fundamental rights to include legal rights as well.

The types of constitutional remedies, primarily through writs, are:

  • 1. Habeas Corpus: Translating to "produce the body," this writ is a powerful tool against unlawful detention. If an individual is unlawfully detained, the court can order their immediate release, ensuring their liberty isn't unjustly curtailed.
  • 2. Mandamus: Meaning "we command," this writ directs a public official or body to perform a duty that they are legally obligated to perform but have failed to do so. It ensures that administrative authorities act in accordance with the law.
  • 3. Prohibition: This writ prohibits a lower court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to the principles of natural justice. It acts as a check on the potential overreach of lower judicial bodies.
  • 4. Certiorari: Meaning "to be certified," this writ is issued to quash the orders of inferior courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial bodies that have acted beyond their jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice.
  • 5. Quo Warranto: Translating to "by what authority," this writ is issued to prevent a person from holding a public office to which they are not entitled. It ensures that public offices are held by qualified and deserving individuals.
Each of these writs serves a unique purpose but collectively ensures that the rule of law prevails. They act as safeguards, ensuring that the executive and other authorities function within the bounds of their powers and do not infringe upon the rights of the citizens.

Question1:- Rajesh, who is a poor laborer is accused of theft and is subsequently arrested by police on the basis of CCTV Footage, however, the police do not produce him before a Magistrate for two weeks after the arrest. Determine
  • A. The Detention would still be lawful as he was arrested on the basis of CCTV Footage
  • B. The Detention would be illegal as he was not produced before the Magistrate
  • C. The Detention would be illegal only if there was no evidence of theft
  • D. The Detention would be legal only if he was arrested by a police officer above the rank of Sub-Inspector
Answer is B is correct. According to Article 22 of the Indian Constitution, every person who has been arrested by police should be produced before a Magistrate within twenty-four hours of the arrest or else the detention would become unlawful. Therefore, the aggrieved person can file a Writ of Habeas Corpus for enforcement of his fundamental rights. Hence (b) is the correct answer.
Question2:- Ramesh and Rajni is a married couple. Ramesh works in factory. One day one of his co-workers accused him for committing theft in factory but did not informed police about that. However, one day Ramesh goes missing and Rajni is unable to find him even after constant efforts. Rajni assumes that Ramesh has been unlawfully detained by police; she files a Writ of Habeas Corpus to produce him before the court, then:
  • A. The Writ Petition would be maintainable
  • B. The Writ Petition would not be maintainable
  • C. Rajni can only file a writ petition after the expiry of 30 days
  • D. Rajni would have to file a writ of Mandamus
Answer is B is correct. The Indian Courts in various cases have held that a Writ of Habeas Corpus would not be maintainable in case of missing persons since it violates the fundamental right of a citizen for free movement. Moreover, the Writ is only maintainable when a person has been illegally detained by an individual or the state. Hence (B) is the correct answer.
Question3:- ABC, a private limited company publishes an advertisement in the newspaper for recruiting 1 person for the post of General Manager; the only condition was that he should have a master's degree. However, after the interview, Rakesh who had also applied for the job finds out that an undergraduate has been appointed for the said post, and he subsequently files a Writ of Quo Warranto to determine under what authority he is holding the office in question. Decide
  • A. The Writ Petition would be maintainable in High Court
  • B. The Writ Petition would only be maintainable in the Supreme Court
  • C. The Writ Petition would not be maintainable in either Court
  • D. The Writ Petition would be Maintainable at the discretion of the Court
Answer is C is correct. A writ of Quo Warranto is issued to call upon a holder of a public office and to show under what Authority he is holding the disputed post. Therefore, a writ of Quo Warranto can only be issued to the holder of a public office and is not applicable to private organizations. Hence (C) is the correct answer.
Question4:- Which of the following Writs would be issued by the court if a Municipal Corporation fails to lay down roads in a city even after the plan and budget has been approved by the State Government?
  • A. Writ of Quo Warranto
  • B. Writ of Prohibition
  • C. Writ of Certiorari
  • D. Writ of Mandamus
Answer is D is correct. A Writ of Mandamus is issued by the Court to direct a public authority to perform a public or statutory duty; therefore, in this case, also the court would issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Municipal Corporation to lay down the roads. Hence (D) is the correct answer.
Question5:- A District Consumer Commission in Delhi had passed an order, directing a company to pay compensation to a consumer, however, the case was decided without taking into consideration all the evidences presented by the parties. In such a case, the company can file which of the following writs in order to get a relief?
  • A. Writ of Certiorari
  • B. Writ of Prohibition
  • C. Either Writ of Certiorari or Prohibition
  • D. The Company cannot file a writ against the order
Answer is D is correct. An aggrieved person can file a Writ of Prohibition to prevent an inferior court from exceeding its jurisdiction. Similarly, a person can also file the Writ of Certiorari to quash an order passed by an inferior court. However, in this case, the company has an alternate remedy to approach the State Commission; therefore they cannot file a writ in either High Court or the Supreme Court. Hence (D) is the correct answer.

Syllabus

Test Series

Notification

Brochure

Result