UPSC Previous Year Questions: CSP 2021
One cannot place less emphasis on the fact as to how important it is to solve questions asked by UPSC Previously. In fact, UPSC tends to repeat from its own stock, verbatim.
This thread, shall be solely dedicated for posting questions asked in CSP & CAPF.
I shall be posting questions here on a daily basis. Urge you all to answer these in all seriousness. Shoot doubts if you have any, wrt solving any question.
Remember the idea is to solve them, again. Reading questions and solutions is NOT sufficient.
Cheers!
@Neyawn @root
What is the current situation about National anthem and FRs?
It is said to be violative of FR under Article 19 not religion.
Current situation: It's a fundamental duty which is non enforceable.https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/01/india-supreme-court-rules-national-anthem-no-longer-required-at-cinema/
The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 is applicable to person who intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbance to any assembly engaged in such singing.
It is said to be violative of FR under Article 19 not religion.
Current situation: It's a fundamental duty which is non enforceable.https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/01/india-supreme-court-rules-national-anthem-no-longer-required-at-cinema/
The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 is applicable to person who intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbance to any assembly engaged in such singing.
Answer was given All three are correct(C)
I think Art 25 (Freedom of conscience, practice and propagate the religion ) has nothing to do with National anthem. This is PYQ.
It is said to be violative of FR under Article 19 not religion.
Current situation: It's a fundamental duty which is non enforceable.https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/01/india-supreme-court-rules-national-anthem-no-longer-required-at-cinema/
The Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 is applicable to person who intentionally prevents the singing of the Indian National Anthem or causes disturbance to any assembly engaged in such singing.
Answer was given All three are correct(C)
I think Art 25 (Freedom of conscience, practice and propagate the religion ) has nothing to do with National anthem. This is PYQ.
Article 25 doesn't have anything to do with it.
Article 25 doesn't have anything to do with it.
No it is used by sc in Emmanuel case of 1986
The Supreme Court of India found that the expulsion of school children for not singing the national anthem constituted a violation of their right to freedom of expression. Three school children were expelled from school after refusing to sing the Indian national anthem since it was against their religious faith as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their representative argued that the expulsion was an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The Court reasoned that a limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on a law with statutory force. Yet, there were no provisions of the law that obligated individuals to sing the national anthem and the State of Kerala’s Department of Education lacked statutory force to require school children to participate.
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1508089/
No it is used by sc in Emmanuel case of 1986
The Supreme Court of India found that the expulsion of school children for not singing the national anthem constituted a violation of their right to freedom of expression. Three school children were expelled from school after refusing to sing the Indian national anthem since it was against their religious faith as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their representative argued that the expulsion was an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The Court reasoned that a limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on a law with statutory force. Yet, there were no provisions of the law that obligated individuals to sing the national anthem and the State of Kerala’s Department of Education lacked statutory force to require school children to participate.
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1508089/
This won't be applicable in the current situation right, post the ruling in 2018. https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/01/india-supreme-court-rules-national-anthem-no-longer-required-at-cinema/
No it is used by sc in Emmanuel case of 1986
The Supreme Court of India found that the expulsion of school children for not singing the national anthem constituted a violation of their right to freedom of expression. Three school children were expelled from school after refusing to sing the Indian national anthem since it was against their religious faith as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their representative argued that the expulsion was an infringement of their fundamental rights to freedom expression under Article 19 and freedom of religion under Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The Court reasoned that a limitation on the right to freedom of expression must be based on a law with statutory force. Yet, there were no provisions of the law that obligated individuals to sing the national anthem and the State of Kerala’s Department of Education lacked statutory force to require school children to participate.
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1508089/
This won't be applicable in the current situation right, post the ruling in 2018. https://www.jurist.org/news/2018/01/india-supreme-court-rules-national-anthem-no-longer-required-at-cinema/
No still applicable the national anthem case revolved around standing up as a mark to show respect.
Emmanuel case is about singing national anthem.
The below article gave a connection btw both cases.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thehindu.com/news/national/sc-modifies-order-says-national-anthem-not-mandatory/article22403095.ece/amp/
Answer was given All three are correct(C)
I think Art 25 (Freedom of conscience, practice and propagate the religion ) has nothing to do with National anthem. This is PYQ.
Answer would still remain sameC.
As of now no changes has been made by either govt or sc
Except national anthem case where in 2016 it gave interim order making mandatory for all theaters to play national anthem and people tostand upas a mark to show respect.
2018 Sc reversed the order and said it is voluntary for theaters to play national anthem but people as to stand up when it plays.
So it doesn't deal with singing of national anthem
The case that deal with singing of national anthem is Emmanuel case 1986,where it gave compulsion of singing national anthem is violative of art 25 and 19,as no statutory law was made in this regard.
Aragorn001,GKJ
Write your comment…
