• +91 9971497814
  • info@interviewmaterial.com

Chapter 1- Constitution: Why and How? Interview Questions Answers

Question 1 :
Which of these is not a function of the constitution?
(a) It gives a guarantee of the rights of the citizen.
(b) It marks out different spheres of power for different branches of government.
(c) It ensures that good people come to power. id) It gives expression to some shared values.

Answer 1 :

(c) It ensures that good people come to power.

Question 2 :
Which of the following is a good reason to conclude that the authority of the constitution is higher than that of the parliament?
(а) The constitution was framed before the parliament came into being.
(b) The constitution makers were more eminent leaders than the members of the parliament.
(c) The constitution specifies how parliament is to be formed and what are its powers.
(d) The constitution cannot be amended by the parliament.

Answer 2 :

(c) The constitution specifies how parliament is to be formed and what are its powers.

Question 3 :
State whether the following statements about a constitution are True or False:
(a) Constitutions are written documents about formation and power of the government.
(b) Constitutions exist and are required only in democratic countries.
(c) Constitution is a legal document that does not deal with ideals and values.
(d) A constitution gives its citizens a new identity.

Answer 3 :

(a) False
(b) False
(c) False
(d) True

Question 4 :
State whether the following inferences about the making of the Indian Constitution are Correct or Incorrect. Give reasons to support your answer.
(a) The Constituent Assembly did not represent the Indian people since it was not elected by all citizens.
(b) Constitution making did not involve any major decision since there was a general consensus among the leaders at that time about its basic framework.
(c) There was little originality in the Constitution, for much of it was borrowed from other countries.

Answer 4 :

(a) It is incorrect to say that Constituent Assembly did not represent Indian people

  1. Although the members of Constituent Assembly were not elected by Universal suffrage, but there was a serious attempt to make the Assembly a representative body.
  2. The Constituent Assembly represented the members of all religions, social and economic groups to accommodate all shades of opinion within it.
  3. The Assembly had 26 members even from scheduled castes.
(b) It is correct to say because:

  1. Objective the Resolution containing principles was moved by Nehru in 1946 brought by the nationalist movement.
  2. Constituent Assembly could not have functioned without any background consensus on main principles.
  3. Our constitution does not have only rules and procedures but a moral commitment also to establish a government to fulfill the promises made to peoples.
(c) It is incorrect to say because:

  1. Though they borrowed a number of provisions from Constitutions of different countries but it was not based upon slavish imitations.
  2. Each provision before it was included, well considered by the members of Constituent Assembly.
  3. Long debates and discussions also took place to examine the suitability to the conditions prevailing in India along with problems and aspirations of the people.

Question 5 :
Give two examples each to support the following conclusions about the Indian Constitution:
(a) The Constitution was made by credible leaders who commanded people’s respect.
(b) The Constitution has distributed power in such a way as to make it difficult to
subvert it.
(c) The Constitution is the locus of people’s hopes and aspirations.

Answer 5 :

(a) The following two factors are responsible:

  1. The members of Constituent Assembly were elected by indirect election by the members of Provincial Legislative Assemblies to be established in 1935. Assembly reflected each of the communities, provinces, princely states through an appropriate formula. Even 28 members belonged to scheduled castes.
  2. The members of Constituent Assembly went through long debates and discussions for 166 days spread over two years eleven months.
(b) The following two factors can be summed up for the same:

  1. Our Constitution has made institutional arrangements of government on the basis of check and balance approach. If one of the institutions goes beyond its limitations, the other checks it.
  2. The procedure for amendments is well elaborated for different articles of the Constitution.
(c) The following factors are responsible for the same because:

  1. The Constitution has provided some Fundamental Rights along with protected provisions,tibebthe judiciary has powers to protect them.
  2. The Constitution of India has incorporated some ‘Directive Principles of State Policy’ which are not justiciable but a moral duty of government. The governmenthas also given some effects to these in the form of fixed minimum wages, formation of Panchayati Raj Institutions, employment guarantee scheme and mid-day meal schemes, etc. to be the hopes and aspirations of the people.

Question 6 :
Why is it necessary for a country to have a clear demarcation of powers and responsibilities in the constitution? What would happen in the absence of such a demarcation?

Answer 6 :

It is necessary for a country to have a clear demarcation of powers and responsibilities
in the constitution because:

  1.  To ensure that no single institution acquires monopoly of power.
  2. In case of transgressions, it may be checked by one of the institutions.
  3. To specify who plays important role in decision-making powers.
  4. It shows how government would be constituted.
  5. It lays down some limits on the government and citizens both which are fundamental in nature which should not to be trespassed by government and citizens.
  6. The Constitution shows how organs of government are interrelated alongwith a demarcation of powers of institutions like legislature, executive and judiciary as well as statutory bodies, ibsbElection Commission of India, etc.
  7. The judiciary has been given a specific place to declare any law unconstitutional if not at par the provisions of Constitution.
In the absence of such a demarcation:

  1. The federal set up would get strained and there would be crisis in center as well as states.
  2. There would be a problem to the citizens and laws will be proved to be unjust and unfair.

Question 7 :
Why is it necessary for a constitution to place limitations on the rulers? Can there be a constitution that gives no power at all to the citizens?

Answer 7 :

It is necessary for a constitution to place limitations on the rulers:

  1. These units are fundamental in the sense that the rulers may not trespass them.
  2. Citizens have been specified certain fundamental rights in Constitution to limit powers of rulers.
  3. Citizens have been granted some basic rights of liberties also, ibebright to freedom of speech and expressions, freedom to form trade union and associations, etc. which cannot be checked by the government.
  4. Only during the national emergency or in national interest, these rights may be withdrawn during some specific periods.
  5. It is necessary for a constitution to place limitations on the rulers otherwise they may turn to be a dictator and may overlook the people’s interest constitution guards and controls the rulers.
No, there can be no constitution that gives no power to its people:

  1. In a Constitutional monarchy, monarch decides the powers of people.
  2. In a dictatorship, the ruler is supposed to get the support of people to cling to the power, i.e. Pakistan’s General Musharraf also conducted periodic referendum to hold power.
  3. In a democratic institutions/Constitution; the people are the real source of power where public mandate is required to enact the policies for rulers.
  4. These can’t be a Constitution that gives no power at all to the citizens. It is always for the welfare of the citizens of the country.

Question 8 :
The Japanese Constitution was made when the US occupation army was still in control of Japan after its defeat in the Second World War. The Japanese constitution could not have had any provision that the US government did not like. Do you see any problem in this way of making the constitution? In which way was the Indian experience different from this?

Answer 8 :

The Japanese Constitution could not have had any provision that the US government did not like, after the defeat of Japan in Second World War (1939-1945), due to fact that Constitution seeks to perform the functions and look after the interest of the rulers or authorities in the country who has occupied it. But, in a democratic country, a constitution expresses the fundamental identity of people as in India.
Indian experience was different from the experience of Japan in the following manner:

  1. The Indian Constitution was framed by the Constituent Assembly which was elected to aspire India to be a society free of any sort of discrimination among people.
  2. The framers of Indian Constitution worked for leading a life of social dignity and social respect along with minimum material well-being and education to an individual.
  3. Indian Constitution enabled the government to fulfill the aspirations of society, to make it more better.
  4. Indian Constitution has inculcated the federal spirit with the distribution of powers between the different levels of government as well as bicameral legislatures and independent judiciary have also been set up.
  5. The Constituent Assembly framed Constitution after a long debates and discussions to provide political, social and legal equalities to the people.

Question 9 :
Raj at asked his teacher this question: “The constitution is a fifty year old and therefore outdated book. No one took my consent for implementing it. It is written in such tough language that I cannot understand it. Tell me why should I obey this document?” If you were the teacher, how would you answer Rajat?

Answer 9 :

Had I been the teacher I would answer Rajat:

  1. Indian Constitution is a blend of flexibility and rigidity. Hence, despite being fifty years old, it is not outdated as it has been amended a number of times whenever required to be modified from time to time.
  2. The Constitution was framed by the Constituent Assembly of an elected representatives from every section of society.
  3. Though Constituent Assembly was dominated by Congress which occupied 82% of the seats in Assembly, but it has representation from every class, religion and communities, regions to accommodate all shades of opinion within it.
  4. Though it is not possible to consult each and every individual in framing of Constitution, hence, the provisions were made to elect representatives from every section to reflect the people from all these.

Question 10 :
In a discussion on the experience of the working of our Constitution, three speakers took three different positions:
(a) Harbans: The Indian Constitution has succeeded in giving us a framework of democratic government.
(b) Neha: The Constitution made solemn promises of ensuring liberty, equality and fraternity. Since this has not happened, the Constitution has failed.
(c) Nazima: The Constitution has not failed us. We have failed the Constitution.
Do you agree with any of these positions? If yes, why? If not, what is your own position?

Answer 10 :

In the above mentioned conversation of three people focused whether the working of our Constitution is fruitful or not:

  1. Indian Constitution is a document consisting the supreme and fundamental laws of country about powers, functions and structures of the government.
  2. Constitution also shows that how the organs of government are interrelated with each other as well as the relationship between the government and its citizens.
  3. In the Preamble of Constitution, India has been declared A Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic to provide social, economic and political justice to all the citizens along with introduction of universal adult franchise also. But in practice Indian democracy is suffering from various social and economic evils which have proved a curse.

  1. Equality and freedom of citizens is disturbed on the basis of some unconstitutional activities.
  2. Though the provisions for free and fair elections have been made even then money and muscle power is prevailing everywhere.
  3. Sometimes political leaders are found to belong to criminal background and some play the politics of vote bank.
  4. The judiciary has to interfere in the functioning of executive and legislatures,
  5. Various problems are still being faced by country, i.e. terrorism, naxalism, communal riots, etc.
Hence, we agree with the position of Neha that the goals which were supposed to be achieved through Constitution, has not still been achieved due to above mentioned facts, so we can say that the Constitution has failed to fulfill the needs of the individuals.


  1. We have failed the Constitution because we have not applied our sincere efforts towards citizens’ welfare properly.
  2. Corruption has taken place in public and private sector both, this is not only due to representatives but the citizens are not vigilant and dutiful also.
  3. The citizens are also supposed to be active in public affairs and to support other citizens in the exercise of the rights and discharge of obligations.
  4. The citizens should get themselves educated to curb social and economic inequality to implement the Constitution. Hence, it can be concluded that Constitution has not failed us but we have failed the Constitution due to our negligence towards our rights and duties



Chapter 1- Constitution: Why and How? Contributors


Share your email for latest updates


Our partners