In case of A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 was found conflicting with the two Articles:
Articles 14 and 17
Incorrect AnswerArticles 19 and 21
Correct AnswerArticles 23 and 25
Incorrect AnswerArticles 23 and 32.
Incorrect AnswerExplanation:
- Option 1: Articles 14 and 17
- Article 14 guarantees equal protection of the laws.
- Article 17 abolishes untouchability.
- Not relevant to the case.
- Option 2: Articles 19 and 21
- Correct Answer.
- Article 19 discusses the protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, assembly, etc.
- Article 21 provides that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
- The court examined if the Preventive Detention Act violated these rights.
- Option 3: Articles 23 and 25
- Article 23 prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labor.
- Article 25 ensures freedom of conscience and free profession of religion.
- Not relevant to the case.
- Option 4: Articles 23 and 32
- Article 23 again prohibits traffic in human beings and forced labor.
- Article 32 provides the right to constitutional remedies.
- Not relevant to this context.
By: santosh ProfileResourcesReport error