UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Delhi HC seeks govt.’s reply on police action

Q1. The freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms under Article 19(1)(b) may be subjected to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(3). Such restrictions may be imposed only in the interests of which of the following?

  • A. Public order, decency, morality and defamation
  • B. The sovereignty and integrity of India, and public order
  • C. The security of the State and friendly relations with foreign States
  • D. Public order and contempt of court

Q2. Prohibitory orders under Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023 (the successor to Section 144 of the CrPC) are ordinarily issued by which one of the following authorities?

  • A. A Judicial Magistrate of the first class having territorial jurisdiction over the area
  • B. The Director General of Police of the State or Union Territory concerned
  • C. A District Magistrate, Sub-Divisional Magistrate or other Executive Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government
  • D. The Superintendent of Police in charge of the district concerned

Q3. In the Ramlila Maidan case (2012), the Supreme Court directed which one of the following to frame standing orders/SOPs governing police conduct during protests?

  • A. The Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D)
  • B. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)
  • C. The Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF)
  • D. The Delhi Police

Q4. With reference to the Ramlila Maidan case (2012), consider the following statements: 1. The case arose from a police crackdown, around midnight, on an anti-corruption/black-money agitation led by yoga guru Baba Ramdev at Ramlila Maidan in 2011. 2. Police invoked Section 144 of the CrPC to disperse the sleeping protesters. 3. The Supreme Court held that tear gas ought to be resorted to only as a measure of last resort. 4. The Court exonerated the Delhi Police of all responsibility and placed the entire blame for the incident on the protesters. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

  1. The case arose from a police crackdown, around midnight, on an anti-corruption/black-money agitation led by yoga guru Baba Ramdev at Ramlila Maidan in 2011.
  2. Police invoked Section 144 of the CrPC to disperse the sleeping protesters.
  3. The Supreme Court held that tear gas ought to be resorted to only as a measure of last resort.
  4. The Court exonerated the Delhi Police of all responsibility and placed the entire blame for the incident on the protesters.
  • A. 1 only
  • B. 3 only
  • C. 4 only
  • D. 2 and 4

Q5. Consider the following statements regarding prohibitory orders under Indian law: 1. Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023 corresponds to the erstwhile Section 144 of the CrPC, 1973. 2. It can be invoked in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger, including to prevent a disturbance of the public tranquillity or a riot. 3. In cases of emergency, an order under the provision may be passed ex parte, without prior notice to the affected persons. 4. The provision is contained in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — the penal code that replaced the Indian Penal Code. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

  1. Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023 corresponds to the erstwhile Section 144 of the CrPC, 1973.
  2. It can be invoked in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger, including to prevent a disturbance of the public tranquillity or a riot.
  3. In cases of emergency, an order under the provision may be passed ex parte, without prior notice to the affected persons.
  4. The provision is contained in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — the penal code that replaced the Indian Penal Code.
  • A. 4 only
  • B. 1 and 2
  • C. 2 and 3
  • D. 3 and 4

Q6. With reference to an order under Section 163 of the BNSS, 2023, consider the following: 1. It ordinarily remains in force for not more than two months from the date it is made. 2. The State Government may, by notification, extend such an order for a total period of up to six months. 3. It may be directed to a particular individual, to persons residing in a particular area, or to the public generally. 4. It can be invoked only after a national emergency has been proclaimed under Article 352 of the Constitution. Which of the above are correctly identified?

  1. It ordinarily remains in force for not more than two months from the date it is made.
  2. The State Government may, by notification, extend such an order for a total period of up to six months.
  3. It may be directed to a particular individual, to persons residing in a particular area, or to the public generally.
  4. It can be invoked only after a national emergency has been proclaimed under Article 352 of the Constitution.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1, 2 and 3
  • C. 2, 3 and 4
  • D. 1 and 4 only

Q7. With reference to the NEET-UG examination at the centre of the 2026 protests, which one of the following statements is correct?

  • A. It is conducted by the National Testing Agency for admission to MBBS, BDS and AYUSH undergraduate courses
  • B. It is the exclusive gateway for admission to every undergraduate medical, nursing and pharmacy course in the country
  • C. It is conducted solely by the CBSE, which alone finalises all medical college admissions in India
  • D. It guarantees a government medical college seat to every candidate who qualifies

Q8. In the context of the 2026 examination-irregularity controversy, the term 'on-screen marking' most precisely refers to:

  • A. The machine reading of OMR answer sheets through optical mark recognition
  • B. The evaluation of scanned answer scripts by examiners on a digital screen instead of on physical paper
  • C. The live monitoring of candidates through screen-surveillance during an online examination
  • D. The statistical normalisation of marks obtained across different examination shifts

Q9. When the Delhi High Court 'issued notice' to the Centre and the Delhi Police in the PILs over the police action, it meant that the Court had:

  • A. Formally directed the respondents to file their replies to the allegations
  • B. Recorded a preliminary finding that the police had used excessive force
  • C. Passed an interim order staying all further police action against the protesters
  • D. Finally admitted the petition and reserved its judgment for pronouncement

Q10. Regarding the Delhi High Court's handling of the PILs on the July 2026 police action, consider the following: 1. The PILs alleged excessive use of force by the police against protesting NEET-UG students near Parliament. 2. The High Court ordered the preservation of CCTV and other digital footage of the police action. 3. The Bench observed that the allegations may not be 'isolated individual incidents.' 4. The High Court struck down the prohibitory orders that had been imposed under Section 163 of the BNSS. Which of the above are correctly identified?

  1. The PILs alleged excessive use of force by the police against protesting NEET-UG students near Parliament.
  2. The High Court ordered the preservation of CCTV and other digital footage of the police action.
  3. The Bench observed that the allegations may not be 'isolated individual incidents.'
  4. The High Court struck down the prohibitory orders that had been imposed under Section 163 of the BNSS.
  • A. 1 and 3 only
  • B. 2 and 4 only
  • C. 1, 2 and 3
  • D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Q11. Under the constitutional scheme for the National Capital Territory of Delhi (Article 239AA), the subject of 'police' is best described as:

  • A. A State List subject under the exclusive control of the Delhi Legislative Assembly
  • B. A Concurrent List subject shared equally by the Centre and the Delhi government
  • C. A matter reserved to the Union and outside the legislative competence of the Delhi Legislative Assembly
  • D. A municipal function administered by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Q12. In which one of the following judgments did the Supreme Court describe the right to peaceful protest as a fundamental right rooted in India's democratic traditions, while examining the proportionality of police force used against demonstrators?

  • A. Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006)
  • B. Anita Thakur v. State of Jammu & Kashmir (2016)
  • C. Ramlila Maidan v. Home Secretary, Union of India (2012)
  • D. In Re: Destruction of Public & Private Properties v. State of A.P. (2009)