In India, which one of the following Constitutional Amendments was widely believed to be enacted to overcome the judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights? [2023]
Poll Results
Please login to vote and see the results.
Sign up to our innovative Q&A platform to pose your queries, share your wisdom, and engage with a community of inquisitive minds.
Log in to our dynamic platform to ask insightful questions, provide valuable answers, and connect with a vibrant community of curious minds.
Forgot your password? No worries, we're here to help! Simply enter your email address, and we'll send you a link. Click the link, and you'll receive another email with a temporary password. Use that password to log in and set up your new one!
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
The Supreme Court has agreed to review a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the modifications made to the right to freedom of speech and expression through the First Amendment to the Indian Constitution in 1951. The petitioner claims that this amendment undermines the basic structure doctrRead more
The Supreme Court has agreed to review a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the modifications made to the right to freedom of speech and expression through the First Amendment to the Indian Constitution in 1951. The petitioner claims that this amendment undermines the basic structure doctrine. In the first year of the Constitution’s implementation, certain judicial decisions, such as the Shankari Prasad case, created challenges, particularly regarding the fundamental rights chapter. To address these issues, Parliament enacted the First Constitutional Amendment, introducing Articles 19(2), 31A, and 31B.
See lessIssues in the first year of the Constitution:
• Some courts interpreted Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression, as so broad that individuals were not held accountable even if they advocated violent crimes, including murder. In contrast, other countries with written constitutions allow restrictions on free speech to prevent misuse.
• Article 19(1)(g), which confers the right to practice any profession or business, is subject to reasonable limitations in the “interests of the general public.” While these terms are broad enough to support state-led nationalization schemes, it was considered necessary to add clarity through a modification to Article 19(6).
• Article 31 also presented unforeseen challenges. Despite clauses (4) and (6) of Article 31, agrarian reform laws passed by state legislatures over the previous three years had faced legal delays, prevented their timely execution and affected large populations.
The First Constitutional Amendment sought primarily to modify Article 19 to address the above concerns, as well as to ensure the constitutional validity of land reform laws, particularly zamindari abolition laws, in various states. Additionally, a few minor changes were proposed to other articles to prevent potential future issues.
The correct answer is 1st Amendment. Explanation: The 1st Amendment to the Indian Constitution, enacted in 1951, was widely believed to be introduced to overcome certain judicial interpretations of Fundamental Rights, particularly in the areas of freedom of speech and expression, right to property,Read more
The correct answer is 1st Amendment.
Explanation: The 1st Amendment to the Indian Constitution, enacted in 1951, was widely believed to be introduced to overcome certain judicial interpretations of Fundamental Rights, particularly in the areas of freedom of speech and expression, right to property, and special provisions for backward classes. The amendment was brought in response to judicial decisions that invalidated laws related to land reform and restrictions on free speech, which the government considered necessary for social and economic progress.
See less