CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Constitution of India
Which of the following is stated in Article 13 of the Constitution of India regarding laws that conflict with Fundamental Rights?
Under Article 13, any law that is inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void only to the extent of the inconsistency. The valid, separable portion of the law survives, so the entire statute is not automatically invalid.
- ALaws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights are void to the extent of the inconsistencyCorrect
- BSuch laws remain valid until Parliament repeals them
- CSuch laws are void in their entirety, even if only a part conflicts
- DSuch laws can be struck down only by the President
Explanation
Article 13 provides that laws inconsistent with or in derogation of Fundamental Rights are void to the extent of the contravention. This is the doctrine of severability. The option saying the whole law is void ignores that only the offending part is void, if separable.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Constitution of India shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Constitution of India questions
- Fundamental Duties were added to the Constitution of India by which amendment, and in which Part are they placed?
- A Bill passed by the Lok Sabha is sent to the Rajya Sabha, which wants to reject it entirely. The Bill is a Money Bill. What is the position…
- A tribunal decides a dispute while clearly exceeding the jurisdiction given to it by statute. Aggrieved, the company approaches the High Cou…
- In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, what did the Supreme Court hold regarding Parliament's power to amend the Constitution?
- An Ordinance is promulgated by the President while Parliament is not in session. Parliament reassembles on 1 July. Neither House passes a re…
- A Constitution Amendment Bill seeks to change the provisions relating to the representation of States in Parliament. Which procedure must be…