The Rise Of Deepfake Technology: A Threat To Evidence In Arbitration?
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/the-rise-of-deepfake-technology-a-threat-to-evidence-in-arbitration-242718

🎆 HAPPY CONSTITUTION DAY

Guys there are some very good recent conceptual based Questions do solve them fast don't delay this task.

If you have been following our posts and have solved the earlier MCQs you will definitely be able answer these MCQs correctly.

Presently How Many Articles Are There in Our Constitution❓

Which is/are the Most Important provision or Concept of Indian Constitution❓

#Question
⏳🚀 #Enjoy_Learning

😊 आज यह बन के तैयार हो गया था सदस्यों के मूल हस्ताक्षर सहित मूल प्रति जाकर देख लें।

कलाकारों के नाम और अब तक किए गए परिवर्तन को भी देखिएगा

Read the original constitution here:-

🌟 All constitutional law illustration

⚡ Must watch to know the reason behind each art for that Part.

✍️ Sanskrit language was proposed by ambedkar as National Language.

https://youtu.be/MjCPrPwt2W4?feature=shared

PIL In Patna High Court Challenges Bihar Law Increasing Reservation To 65%; Says SEBC Quota Need Not Be Proportionate To Population
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/patna-high-court/pil-patna-high-court-challenging-constitutional-validity-bihar-reservation-act-2023-bihar-in-admission-in-educational-institutions-reservation-act-243055

The answers of the Constitution Day Special Quiz(Part 1) are given below :
1. In Supriyo v. Union of India, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held :
(a) Right to marry is a fundamental right.
(b) Right to marry is not a fundamental right.
(c) Right to marry is not a fundamental right but the right to recognition of a civil union is a fundamental right.
(d) (b) and (c) .
Answer : (b). The Constitution Bench unanimously held that right to marry is not a fundamental right.
2. When Governors withhold assent to a Bill, what should be the next step taken by them :
(a) The Governor must return the bill as soon as possible to the legislature for reconsideration.
(b) The Governor must refer the Bill to the President for assent.
(c) The Governor must refer the bill to the Chief Minister.
(d) The Governor need not do anything further.
Answer : (a). The Supreme Court recently held in State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary to Governor of Punjab(2023) that a Governor, on withholding assent to a bill, must return it to the legislature. In State of Telangana v. Hon'ble Secretary to Her Excellency the Governor(2023), the Supreme Court observed that as per the proviso to Article 200, the Governor must return the bill "as soon as possible".
3. What has the Supreme Court held about the right of a religious denomination to excommunicate?
(a) The Supreme Court has held that the right to excommunicate is a part of fundamental rights under Articles 25 and 26.
(b) The Supreme Court has held that excommunication infringes constitutional morality and can’t be claimed as a fundamental right by a religious denomination.
(c) The Supreme Court has held that a religious denomination’s right to excommunicate must prevail over an individual’s right to practice religion.
(d) The Supreme Court has prima facie expressed that excommunication violates constitutional morality and has referred the matter to a 9-judge bench for an authoritative pronouncement.
Answer : (d). In Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Anr(2023), a 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court prima facie observed that excommunication violates the principles of constitutional morality. However, since a coordinate bench in Sardar Syedna Taher Saifuddin Saheb v. State of Bombay(1962) struck down a legislation prohibiting excommunication, the matter was referred to a larger bench. Noting that the issues relating to the ambit of religious freedom were subject matter of the Sabarimala reference pending before a 9-judge bench, the bench referred the Dawoodi Bohra case to that bench. 
4. Government bars the telecast of a TV channel on the ground that it airs only views critical of the government policies. What do you think about the Government action?
(a) The Government action is valid as Article 19(2) enables it to restrict the expression of views which are against the State.
(b) The Government action is valid as the freedom of the press is also coupled with the duty to support the Government policies.
(c) The Government action is unconstitutional because criticism of governmental policy is not a ground stipulated in Article 19(2).
(d) The Government action is unconstitutional but not illegal because the grant of statutory license of the channel is subject to the condition that it should support the government policies.
Answer : (c). "Criticism of governmental policy can by no stretch of imagination be brought within the fold of any of the grounds stipulated in Article 19(2)", held the Supreme Court in Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd vs Union of India and others(2023).
5. Citizens can claim fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution only if they perform their fundamental duties under Article 51A.
(a) The statement is correct because only those who perform their duties can make a moral claim for rights.

(b) The statement is correct because only lazy and irresponsible persons think only of their rights without considering their duties.
(c) The statement is correct because for the development of the country, citizens must be concerned more about their duties than their rights.
(d) The statement is wrong because the Constitutionally guaranteed rights are not conditional on the individuals performing their fundamental duties.
Answer : (d).  
6. According to the Constitution, India is :
(a) A Union of States.
(b) A Federation of States.
(c) Confederation of States.
(d) Assembly of States.
Answer : (a). Article 1 describes India as a "Union of States".
7. Which of the following statements is correct :
(a) Our Constitution only recognises the concept of “cooperative federalism”.
(b) Our Constitution recognises the concept of “uncooperative federalism” along with “cooperative federalism”
(c) Our Constitution does not recognise “uncooperative federalism”.
(d) Our Constitution only recognises the concept of “uncooperative federalism”.
Answer : (b). In Union of India and Anr versus M/s Mohit Minerals Through Director(2022), the Supreme Court discussed the concept of "uncooperative federalism" along with "cooperative federalism" and observed that a degree of contestation between the Centre and the States is also good for democracy. "Indian federalism is a dialogue between cooperative and uncooperative federalism", observed the Court. The decision was in the context of GST council recommendations.
8. Can the Preamble to the Constitution of India be amended? Choose the most correct answer.
(a) The Preamble cannot be amended as it is not a part of the Constitution.
(b) Preamble cannot be amended as only the Articles of the Constitution can be amended using the powers under Article 368.
(c) Preamble can be amended by the Parliament but without altering the basic structure of the Constitution.
(d) A Constitutional amendment is not necessary to amend the Preamble and it can be amended through an ordinary legislative amendment bill.
Answer : (c). In Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court held that the Preamble can be amended subject to the basic structure doctrine.
9. How many Constitution Amendment Acts have been enacted so far?
(a) 106
(b) 128
(c) 104
(d) 103
Answer : (a). The latest amendment is the Constitution (106th Amendment) Act 2023, which provides for women's reservation in legislatures. 
10. Can the Governor order a floor test to settle an intra-party dispute?
(a) Yes
(b) No
(c) This issue is yet to be answered.
Answer : (b). In Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary to Governor of Maharashtra (2023), a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that a Governor cannot order a floor test to settle an intra-party dispute as the Governor cannot enter the political arena.
11. Government can claim absolute immunity from disclosure on grounds of national security.
(a) Yes.
(b) No
(c) Depends on the factual situation.
Answer : (b). In Manohar Lal Sharma versus Union of India(2021- Pegasus case), the Supreme Court held that mere invocation of the ground of national security will not give a "free pass" to the State from disclosure. In Madhyamam Broadcasting Ltd vs Union of India and others (2023), the Court held that national security concerns will not completely abrogate the principles of natural justice and that the State cannot claim absolute immunity.
12. A State action, which has no discriminatory intention, results in disadvantage to a particular group, infringing their rights.
(a) The action is not unconstitutional because there is no discriminatory intent.
(b) The action is unconstitutional because it has the effect of discrimination.
(c) The State action cannot be challenged on the sole ground that it affects the right of only a particular group.