UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Protest against govt. cannot be ground for externment, says HC

Q1. Externment is a preventive expulsion of a person from a specified area for a defined term. Under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, what is the maximum period for which such an externment order can remain in force?

  • A. One year
  • B. Two years
  • C. Three years
  • D. Five years

Q2. With reference to the nature of externment as compared with ordinary (punitive) criminal law, consider the following statements: 1. Externment is a preventive measure that does not require a prior conviction by a court. 2. Unlike punitive detention, externment seeks to forestall an apprehended future breach of public order rather than punish a past offence. 3. An externment order rests on objective proof of guilt established at trial rather than on the subjective satisfaction of the authority. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Externment is a preventive measure that does not require a prior conviction by a court.
  2. Unlike punitive detention, externment seeks to forestall an apprehended future breach of public order rather than punish a past offence.
  3. An externment order rests on objective proof of guilt established at trial rather than on the subjective satisfaction of the authority.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q3. Under the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951, the externment powers in Sections 55, 56 and 57 are directed at how many broad categories of persons (namely gangs/bodies of persons, individuals apprehended to commit offences involving force or alarm, and persons already convicted of certain offences)?

  • A. Two
  • B. Three
  • C. Four
  • D. Five

Q4. Consider the following pairings of sections of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 with their subject matter: 1. Section 55 — dispersal of gangs or bodies of persons 2. Section 56 — removal of persons about to commit offences involving force or causing alarm 3. Section 58 — maximum period of externment not to exceed two years 4. Section 59 — externment of persons already convicted of certain offences Which of the above is/are NOT correctly matched?

  1. Section 55 — dispersal of gangs or bodies of persons
  2. Section 56 — removal of persons about to commit offences involving force or causing alarm
  3. Section 58 — maximum period of externment not to exceed two years
  4. Section 59 — externment of persons already convicted of certain offences
  • A. 4 only
  • B. 3 and 4
  • C. 1 and 2
  • D. 2 only

Q5. With reference to the externment order that the Bombay High Court quashed in 2026, consider the following statements: 1. The order was originally passed by a Deputy Commissioner of Police and later confirmed at the appellate stage by a Divisional Commissioner. 2. The High Court held that protests against Union government decisions could, by themselves, justify externment. 3. The order that was quashed had externed the petitioner for a period of one year. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. The order was originally passed by a Deputy Commissioner of Police and later confirmed at the appellate stage by a Divisional Commissioner.
  2. The High Court held that protests against Union government decisions could, by themselves, justify externment.
  3. The order that was quashed had externed the petitioner for a period of one year.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1 and 3 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q6. Consider the following statements about the 2026 Bombay High Court externment ruling: 1. The order was quashed by Justice Madhav Jamdar of the Bombay High Court. 2. The petitioner was the Maharashtra General Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI). 3. The FIRs underlying the order related to protests over issues such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the Gyanvapi dispute. 4. The externment order was ultimately quashed by the Supreme Court of India. Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. The order was quashed by Justice Madhav Jamdar of the Bombay High Court.
  2. The petitioner was the Maharashtra General Secretary of the Social Democratic Party of India (SDPI).
  3. The FIRs underlying the order related to protests over issues such as the Citizenship (Amendment) Act and the Gyanvapi dispute.
  4. The externment order was ultimately quashed by the Supreme Court of India.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1, 2 and 3
  • C. 2 and 4
  • D. 3 and 4

Q7. By expelling a person from a specified area, an externment order most directly restricts which specific freedom guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution?

  • A. The freedom of speech and expression
  • B. The freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms
  • C. The freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India
  • D. The freedom to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India

Q8. The externment order in this case was set aside by the Bombay High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. The power of a High Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights such as those under Articles 19 and 21 is derived from which Article of the Constitution?

  • A. Article 32
  • B. Article 226
  • C. Article 227
  • D. Article 136

Q9. Which one of the following is regarded as the leading Supreme Court decision laying down safeguards for the judicial review of the 'subjective satisfaction' of the detaining authority in preventive detention?

  • A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
  • B. Khudiram Das v. State of West Bengal
  • C. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
  • D. Minerva Mills v. Union of India

Q10. Courts have held that the subjective satisfaction of a detaining/externing authority, though not immune from review, may be interfered with only on a limited set of grounds — namely non-application of mind, reliance on irrelevant or extraneous material, vagueness disabling representation, absence of a live and proximate link, and breach of mandatory procedural safeguards. How many such grounds are enumerated here?

  • A. Three
  • B. Four
  • C. Five
  • D. Six

Q11. In the context of Indian detention law, which one of the following best describes 'preventive detention'?

  • A. Detention of a person after trial and conviction to punish a past offence
  • B. Detention of a person without trial to prevent an apprehended future offence
  • C. Detention of an accused pending trial when bail is denied
  • D. Detention of a person for wilful default in paying a court-imposed fine

Q12. In pulling up the police while quashing the externment order, the Bombay High Court emphasised that the police force are, above all, servants of whom?

  • A. The Chief Minister
  • B. The Prime Minister
  • C. The public / citizens
  • D. The Home Minister