Article 19(4) empowers the State to impose reasonable restrictions on the right of freedom of association and union in the interest of

Consider the following and find the incorrect statement.
1. The freedom of speech under Article 19(1) a includes the right to express one's views and opinions at any issue through any medium e.g. by words, writing, printing picture, film, movie, etc.
2. This right is however not absolute and it allows government to frame laws to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India.
3. The freedom of speech and expression allows a person contempt of court.

A

1 and 2

B

Only 3

C

2 and 3

D

None of these

Which Amendment Act was an off-shoot of the problem of national integration which the country was facing in sixties, enables the State to impose by law reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the fundamental right to freedom guaranteed in Article 19 in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India?

A

Fifteenth

B

Sixteenth

C

Seventeenth

D

States were never given such power

A state may by law impose reasonable restrictions on freedom of trade commerce and intercourse with or within that state in public interest. But such law?

A

Cannot be introduced in legislature without previous sanction of the President of India

B

Does not need any sanction of any authority

C

Cannot be introduced in legislation without previous sanction of the Government of India

D

Cannot be introduced in legislature without previous sanction of the Council of Ministers of the Union

Which of the following statement(s) is/are correct?
1. Fundamental rights are not absolute. They are subject to reasonable restrictions.
2. Freedom of press is implicit in article 19 of the constitution
3. Socially and economically backward classes of persons are entitled to get benefit under clause (4) of Article 15 of the Constitution.
4. Equal protection of laws under Article 14 of the constitution is based upon English law

A

Only 1 and 2 are correct

B

1, 2 and 3 are correct

C

3 and 4 are correct

D

1, 2, 3, and 4 all are correct

If a + b + c + d = 4, then find the value of $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)}}$$ is?

A

0

B

5

C

1

D

4

If a + b + c + d = 4, then the value of $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)}}$$ + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)}}$$ is?

A

0

B

1

C

4

D

1 + abcd

Principle: If an injury is the result of a reasonably foreseeable cause, the person/authority responsible is liable for damages because he has a duty to take reasonable measures to prevent it.
Facts: Janet, a housewife standing at her balcony, was struck on the head by a ball that flew out of a cricket field across her home. Janet sues the District Cricket Association (DCA), the owner of the cricket field for public nuisance and negligence on the ground that the field did not have a fence high enough to prevent such occurrence. District Cricket Association (DCA) claims that only about 10 balls had escaped the field in the previous 10 years and it was therefore an unforeseeable risk. Is there a duty on the part of the District Cricket Association (DCA) to prevent the risk? Is the District Cricket Association (DCA) liable to compensate Janet?

A

Yes. As 10 balls had escaped the field, the risk was reasonably foreseeable. The District Cricket Association (DCA) is responsible and is liable for damages because it has a duty to take reasonable measures to prevent it

B

No. As only 10 balls had escaped the field in the previous 10 years, it was an unforeseeable risk

C

Yes. A person owning a Cricket field is expected to compensate any injury arising out of and in the course of using the cricket field

D

No. Anyone who has chosen to stay near a cricket field is doing so at his own risk and is bound by the rule, volenti non fit injuria

Which of the following were relevant considerations for prohibition on sale of liquor along national and state highways in State of Tamil Nadu v. K. Balu, (2017) 2 SCC 281?
1. There is no fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) to trade in liquor.
2. Under Article 47, the State is under a duty to raise the level of nutrition, standard of living and improve public health.
3. An exception to permit the sale of liquor along a stretch of the highway which passes through the limits of city is arbitrary and violative of Article 14.
4. Right to life under Article 21 signifies a right to live with human dignity, free of noxious substances and intoxicants.
Choose the correct answer from the following:

A

All the four statements are correct

B

1 and 3 only

C

1, 2 and 3 only

D

1, 2 and 4 only

Regarding presentation of any news, comment or information which is likely to jeopardise, endanger or harm the paramount interests of the state and society, under which clause of an article of the Indian Constitution, reasonable restrictions may be imposed on the Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression?

A

Clause 1 of Article 19

B

Clause 2 of Article 19

C

Clause 1 of Article 21

D

Clause 2 of Article 21

Which of the following statements is/are correct?
1. No bill can be introduced in the legislature of a state for imposing reasonable restrictions on the freedom of trade without previous sanction of the President.
2. No bill can be introduced in either House of Parliament for altering the name of a state without the name of a state without the recommendation of the President and the concurrence of the state legislature concerned.
Select the correct answer:

A

1 only

B

2 only

C

Both 1 and 2

D

Neither 1 nor 2