UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — HC dismisses plea challenging Rahul Gandhi’s citizenship

Q1. If a question arises as to whether, when or how a citizen of India has acquired the citizenship of another country, which one of the following is the authority empowered to determine that question?

  • A. The Central Government in the Ministry of Home Affairs, in the manner prescribed by the Citizenship Rules
  • B. The Ministry of External Affairs, acting through the Indian Mission in the country whose citizenship is alleged
  • C. The High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the person concerned ordinarily resides in India
  • D. The Election Commission of India, upon a reference made to it for its opinion by the President

Q2. Consider the following statements comparing Article 9 of the Constitution with Section 9(1) of the Citizenship Act, 1955: 1. Article 9 denies Indian citizenship to a person who has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, and it operates with reference to acquisition before the commencement of the Constitution. 2. Section 9(1) deals with voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of another country on or after 26 January 1950, and such a person ceases to be a citizen of India upon such acquisition. 3. Under both Article 9 and Section 9(1), the loss of Indian citizenship takes effect only when the Central Government passes an order recording that it is not conducive to the public good that the person should continue to be a citizen of India. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Article 9 denies Indian citizenship to a person who has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, and it operates with reference to acquisition before the commencement of the Constitution.
  2. Section 9(1) deals with voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of another country on or after 26 January 1950, and such a person ceases to be a citizen of India upon such acquisition.
  3. Under both Article 9 and Section 9(1), the loss of Indian citizenship takes effect only when the Central Government passes an order recording that it is not conducive to the public good that the person should continue to be a citizen of India.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 2 and 3 only
  • C. 1 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q3. Consider the following statements about renunciation, termination and deprivation of citizenship under the Citizenship Act, 1955: 1. Where a declaration of renunciation is made during a war in which India is engaged, the declaration is to be registered forthwith, and the minor children of the declarant retain Indian citizenship. 2. Cessation of citizenship on the voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of another country operates upon such acquisition and does not depend upon any order made by the Central Government. 3. The Central Government shall not deprive a person of citizenship unless it is satisfied that it is not conducive to the public good that that person should continue to be a citizen of India. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. Where a declaration of renunciation is made during a war in which India is engaged, the declaration is to be registered forthwith, and the minor children of the declarant retain Indian citizenship.
  2. Cessation of citizenship on the voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of another country operates upon such acquisition and does not depend upon any order made by the Central Government.
  3. The Central Government shall not deprive a person of citizenship unless it is satisfied that it is not conducive to the public good that that person should continue to be a citizen of India.
  • A. 1 and 2 only
  • B. 1 and 3 only
  • C. 2 and 3 only
  • D. 1, 2 and 3

Q4. The power of a High Court to issue writs in the nature of quo warranto not merely for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for any other purpose is traceable to which one of the following provisions of the Constitution?

  • A. Article 226
  • B. Article 227
  • C. Article 32
  • D. Article 139

Q5. Which one of the following most accurately describes the writ of quo warranto as issued by courts in India?

  • A. An order calling upon a person to show the legal authority by which he holds a public office of a substantive character
  • B. An order calling upon a person to show the legal authority by which he holds any office, whether public or private, including posts in private associations
  • C. An order directing a public authority to perform a public duty which it has failed or refused to perform
  • D. An order quashing a decision already made by an inferior tribunal that acted without jurisdiction

Q6. A question arises whether a sitting Member of Parliament has become subject to the disqualification of having voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State. The decision on that question rests with which one of the following?

  • A. The President, who acts according to the opinion of the Election Commission of India
  • B. The Presiding Officer of the House concerned, who acts on a report of the Committee of Privileges
  • C. The Central Government in the Ministry of Home Affairs, after inquiry by the prescribed authority
  • D. The Supreme Court, in exercise of its original jurisdiction between the Union and a State

Q7. Consider the following as stated grounds on which a person is disqualified for being chosen as, and for being, a member of either House of Parliament under Article 102(1): 1. He holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, including an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder. 2. He is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court. 3. He is an undischarged insolvent. 4. He is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgement of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

  1. He holds any office of profit under the Government of India or the Government of any State, including an office declared by Parliament by law not to disqualify its holder.
  2. He is of unsound mind and stands so declared by a competent court.
  3. He is an undischarged insolvent.
  4. He is not a citizen of India, or has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a foreign State, or is under any acknowledgement of allegiance or adherence to a foreign State.
  • A. 1, 2 and 3
  • B. 2, 3 and 4
  • C. 1 and 4 only
  • D. 1, 2, 3 and 4

Q8. Consider the following pairs of a statutory instrument and the High Court arrangement it provides for: 1. U.P. High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1948 — amalgamation of the High Court at Allahabad and the Chief Court in Oudh into a single High Court 2. Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960 — sitting of nominated judges of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur for cases arising in specified districts 3. High Court at Bombay (Extension of Jurisdiction to Goa, Daman and Diu) Act, 1981 — sitting of nominated judges of the Bombay High Court at Panaji 4. Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 — establishment of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court Which of the above is/are correctly identified?

  1. U.P. High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1948 — amalgamation of the High Court at Allahabad and the Chief Court in Oudh into a single High Court
  2. Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960 — sitting of nominated judges of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur for cases arising in specified districts
  3. High Court at Bombay (Extension of Jurisdiction to Goa, Daman and Diu) Act, 1981 — sitting of nominated judges of the Bombay High Court at Panaji
  4. Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 — establishment of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court
  • A. 1, 2 and 3
  • B. 2 and 4
  • C. 1 and 4 only
  • D. 3 and 4

Q9. Consider the following statements about the writ petition challenging the citizenship and Lok Sabha membership of the Leader of the Opposition that was disposed of by the Allahabad High Court in August 2026: 1. It was heard by a Division Bench sitting at the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. 2. The petitioner appeared in person and was permitted to withdraw the petition as he produced no documentary evidence in support of his claims. 3. The relief sought was a writ in the nature of habeas corpus. 4. The Bench itself determined the citizenship question and recorded a finding that the respondent had voluntarily acquired British nationality. Which of the statements given above is/are NOT correct?

  1. It was heard by a Division Bench sitting at the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
  2. The petitioner appeared in person and was permitted to withdraw the petition as he produced no documentary evidence in support of his claims.
  3. The relief sought was a writ in the nature of habeas corpus.
  4. The Bench itself determined the citizenship question and recorded a finding that the respondent had voluntarily acquired British nationality.
  • A. 1 and 2
  • B. 2 and 3
  • C. 3 and 4
  • D. 1 and 4

Q10. Which one of the following statements correctly identifies the provision of the Citizenship Act, 1955 and the effect attached to it in relation to Overseas Citizens of India?

  • A. Section 7A — the Central Government may register an eligible applicant as an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder
  • B. Section 7B — an OCI Cardholder is entitled to equality of opportunity in matters of public employment under the State
  • C. Section 5 — the prescribed authority may register a person of Indian origin as an Overseas Citizen of India Cardholder
  • D. Section 7D — the Central Government may register as an OCI Cardholder a person ordinarily resident in India

Q11. Consider the following propositions relating to the judicial approach to public interest litigation in India: 1. Courts may impose costs on a petitioner where the litigation is found to be frivolous and an abuse of the process of law. 2. Courts examine the credentials of the petitioner and whether there was any credible mechanism to verify the information forming the basis of the petition. 3. A petition in the nature of public interest litigation is entertained only if the petitioner shows that a legal right personal to him has been infringed. 4. A writ court may decline relief where allegations against a public representative rest on assertions unsupported by documentary material. Which of the above is/are NOT correct?

  1. Courts may impose costs on a petitioner where the litigation is found to be frivolous and an abuse of the process of law.
  2. Courts examine the credentials of the petitioner and whether there was any credible mechanism to verify the information forming the basis of the petition.
  3. A petition in the nature of public interest litigation is entertained only if the petitioner shows that a legal right personal to him has been infringed.
  4. A writ court may decline relief where allegations against a public representative rest on assertions unsupported by documentary material.
  • A. 3 only
  • B. 1 and 3
  • C. 2 and 4
  • D. 3 and 4