Bright Riders School, Abu Dhabi Judiciary Past Paper PDF

BRIGHT RIDERS SCHOOL, ABU DHABI CHAPTER: JUDICIARY Answer the following Q-1 You read that one of the main functions of the judiciary is ‘upholding the law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights’. Why do you think an independent judiciary is necessary to carry out this important...

BRIGHT RIDERS SCHOOL, ABU DHABI CHAPTER: JUDICIARY Answer the following Q-1 You read that one of the main functions of the judiciary is ‘upholding the law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights’. Why do you think an independent judiciary is necessary to carry out this important function? Ans: The independence of the judiciary allows the courts to play a central role in ‘upholding the law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights’ as it ensures that there is no misuse of power by the legislature and the executive. Anyone can approach the courts if they believe that their rights have been violated and politicians or other socially powerful people cannot use their power to change any judgement. Q2. Re-read the list of Fundamental Rights provided in Chapter 1. How do you think the Right to Constitutional Remedies connects to the idea of judicial review? Ans: Right to Constitutional Remedies declares that citizens can go to court for justice if they believe that any of their Fundamental Rights have been violated by the State. The judiciary has the power to modify or cancel the law if it finds that they violate the basic structure of the constitution. Q 3. Why do you think the introduction of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the 1980s is a significant step in ensuring access to justice for all? Ans: Access to courts has always been difficult for a vast majority of the poor in India. Legal procedures involve a lot of money and time. The poor who are illiterate and financially weak find it difficult going to court to get justice. In the 1980s the Supreme Court devised a mechanism of Public Interest Litigation or PIL to increase access to justice for the poor and illiterate. Any individual or organisation can file a PIL in the High Court or the Supreme Court on behalf of those whose rights are being violated. It is not necessary, that the person filing a case should have a direct interest in the case. Q 4. From the judgment on the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation what the judges meant when they said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life. Ans: Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case portrays the plight of lakhs of persons who live on pavements and in slums in the city of Bombay. They constitute nearly half the population of the city. These men and women came to Court to ask for a judgment that they cannot be evicted from their shelters without being offered alternative accommodation. They rely for their rights on Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees that no person shall be deprived of his life except according to procedure established by law. They do not contend that they have a right to live on the pavements. Their contention is that they have a right to live, a right which cannot be exercised without the means of livelihood. They have no option but to flock to big cities like Bombay, which provide the means of bare subsistence. They only choose a pavement or a slum which is nearest to their place of work. Their plea is that the right to life is misleading without a right to the protection of the means by which alone life can be lived. Q5. How does the phrase "hungry stomachs, overflowing god owns! We will not accept it!" used in the poster relate to the photo essay on the Right to Food on page 61? The duties of the government to uphold the Right to Food are the following: To provide food to people who cannot afford the basic meals. To ensure that no one dies of hunger or malnutrition. To provide food to people who are unable to earn their own livelihood. The phase ‘hungry stomachs, overflowing godowns! We will not accept it!’ relates to the photo essay on page 61 because it highlights the situation of drought that took place in Rajasthan and Orissa in 2001. During that time, millions of people faced acute shortage of food. However, government godowns were overflowing from grains. These grains were just being wasted and were being eaten by rats. This situation was not acceptable by the people and thus, People’s Union of Civil Liberties (PUCL) filed a PIL in the Supreme Court against the guilty state governments. They were then directed to provide more employment, food at cheaper rates and mid-day meals for children. In this situation, the filed PIL helped bring relief to many Additional questions. 1.Why removing a judge is a difficult process? Ans: The Constitution has given independence of judiciary as well as guaranteed that all judges in the High Court as well as the Supreme Court are appointed with very little interference from these other branches of government. Once appointed to this office, it is also very difficult to remove a judge. 1. Constitutional Safeguards: The Constitution of India provides strong protections for judges. They can only be removed on grounds of "proven misbehaviour or incapacity". 2. Parliamentary Approval: The removal process requires a motion to be passed by both Houses of Parliament. 3. Inquiry Committee: Before the motion is debated in Parliament, an inquiry committee is formed to investigate the charges. This committee includes a Supreme Court judge, a Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist. 4. Detailed Procedure: The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, outlines a detailed procedure for the investigation and removal process. This includes the submission of a signed notice by a significant number of members of Parliament, an investigation by the committee, and the submission of a report. These stringent requirements ensure that judges can perform their duties without fear of arbitrary removal, maintaining the integrity and independence of the judiciary. This gives them maximum protection to carry out their work in the best possible way. 2.What is the importance of Article 21? Ans: Article 21 which provides every citizen the Fundamental Right to Life also includes the Right to Health, Right to Food, Right to Water etc. It aims at ensuring citizens the fulfillment of their basic needs. The courts exercise a crucial role in interpreting the Fundamental Rights of citizens and interpret Article 21 of the Constitution. This right tries to ensure that the essential needs of poor people are fulfilled. 3. Assertion (A): The judiciary in India is independent. Reason (R): India is a secular country. A. Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A. B. Both A and R are true and R is not the correct explanation of A. C. A is true but R is false. D. A is false but R is true. Ans: B 4. Assertion (A): Judiciary plays an important role as an organ of the government. Reason (R): It administers justice, disputes, interprets laws protects fundamental rights. A. A is correct and R is wrong. B. both A and R are wrong. C. A is correct and R explains A. D. A is correct and R does not explain A. Ans: C 5. In the following illustration, fill in each tier with the judgment given by the various courts in the Sudha Goel case. Check our responses with others in class 1. Lower court: The Lower Court convicted Sudha’s husband, his mother and his brother-in- law and sentenced all three of them to death. 2. High Court: The High Court passed the judgement stating that Sudha’s husband and the others were innocent and set them free. 3. Supreme Court: The Supreme Court passed a judgement stating that Sudha’s husband and his mother were guilty and sentenced them to prison for life. The court freed the brother-in- law. 6. Keeping the Sudha Goel case in mind, tick the sentences that are true and correct the ones that are false. (a) The accused took the case to the High Court because they were unhappy with the decision of the Trial Court. (b) They went to the High Court after the Supreme Court had given its decision (c) If they do not like the Supreme Court verdict, the accused can go back again to the Trial Court. Ans:(a) True (b) False: They went to the Supreme court after the High court had given its decision. (c) False: The verdict of the Supreme Court is final.