📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!


    âš¡ Azaadi sale - Celebrate Independence Day with Flat 55% Off On all courses! 13 to 17 Aug âš¡ Enroll Now

    Question

    Which is the THIRD sentence of the

    paragraph? Rearrange the following six sentences a, b, c, d, e and f in the proper sequence to form a meaningful paragraph; then answer the questions given below them. a) The Supreme Court verdict of May 2014 striking down a statutory provision for prior government clearance for a Central Bureau of Investigation probe against officials of the rank of joint secretary and above is the touchstone against which the constitutionality of the pre-investigation sanction requirement will be tested. b) The Union government, too, has a set of amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act pending since 2013, including a proviso for prior sanction. c) The court had observed that such a provision destroys the objective of anti-corruption legislation, blocks the truth from surfacing, thwarts independent investigation and forewarns corrupt officers. d) This is the first time a section prescribing punishment for disclosure is being introduced in India, though provisions barring investigation or prosecution without prior sanction are also in force in Maharashtra. e) Anti-corruption legislation in India seems to be in a state of unacceptable flux. f) However, the time limit for the sanctioning authority to act is 180 days in Rajasthan, and 90 days in Maharashtra.
    A f Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    B e Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    C d Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    D c Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
    E b Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

    Solution

    d f b a c e This is the first time a section prescribing punishment for disclosure is being introduced in India, though provisions barring investigation or prosecution without prior sanction are also in force in Maharashtra. However, the time limit for the sanctioning authority to act is 180 days in Rajasthan, and 90 days in Maharashtra. The Union government, too, has a set of amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act pending since 2013, including a proviso for prior sanction. The Supreme Court verdict of May 2014 striking down a statutory provision for prior government clearance for a Central Bureau of Investigation probe against officials of the rank of joint secretary and above is the touchstone against which the constitutionality of the pre-investigation sanction requirement will be tested. The court had observed that such a provision destroys the objective of anti-corruption legislation, blocks the truth from surfacing, thwarts independent investigation and forewarns corrupt officers. Anti-corruption legislation in India seems to be in a state of unacceptable flux.

    Practice Next
    ask-question

    Not sure which exam is best for you Talk to our expert

    Get My Free Call