UPSC Editorials Quiz : 29 May 2026

Solution: B

• Statement I is correct. Section 43D(5) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 imposes a stringent condition on the grant of bail. If the court, upon examining the case diary or charge sheet, finds reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation is prima facie true, bail is ordinarily barred.
• Statement II is also correct. In Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb, the Supreme Court of India held that constitutional courts retain the power to grant bail where prolonged incarceration and delay in trial violate the fundamental right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, even in cases under UAPA.

However, Statement II does not explain Statement I. Instead, it creates a constitutional exception or limitation to the otherwise stringent statutory embargo imposed by Section 43D(5).

Solution: B

• Statement 1 is incorrect because the NPT Review Conference is a high-level plurilateral diplomatic forum held every five years, not annually, to review disarmament pledges and assess safeguard protocols.
• Statement 2 is correct. The treaty sets up a sovereign cut-off date recognizing only five nations as legitimate Nuclear-Weapon States (NWS) based on whether they manufactured and exploded a nuclear device prior to January 1, 1967 (the US, Russia, China, the UK, and France). This creates an asymmetric framework against Non-Nuclear Weapon States (NNWS).
• Statement 3 is incorrect. The IAEA Safeguards Matrix empowers the agency to run strict, mandatory on-site inspections specifically of NNWS facilities to ensure civil material is not diverted for weaponization. It does not mandate identical structural inspections for the civil or military facilities of the P5 nuclear states.
• Statement 4 is correct. The original 1968 draft was meant to run for a 25-year block. It was explicitly granted an indefinite legal extension in 1995 at the New York Review Conference, making its obligations permanent.

Solution: A

• The National Green Tribunal is a specialized judicial body established under the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010. It has appellate jurisdiction over environmental clearances and is empowered to conduct an independent merits review of decisions relating to environmental approvals, forest clearances, and ecological compliance. The Tribunal is expected to apply principles such as sustainable development, the precautionary principle, and intergenerational equity while examining such matters.
• Statement 2 is incorrect because the NGT cannot merely reproduce or mechanically accept the conclusions of executive expert bodies such as appraisal committees. Being a judicial body, it must independently assess the legality, procedural fairness, scientific basis, and environmental implications of the clearance under challenge. Courts have repeatedly emphasized that judicial review by the NGT requires reasoned analysis rather than blind deference to executive findings.

Source

Solution: B

• Statement 1 is correct. Urban areas dominated by concrete, asphalt, glass, and other impervious surfaces experience the Urban Heat Island Effect. These materials absorb and retain heat during the day and slowly release it at night, leading to unusually warm nights and higher heat-related morbidity.
• Statement 2 is incorrect. Most Heat Action Plans (HAPs) prepared by Indian cities are largely advisory and administrative in nature. They are not generally backed by a dedicated, legally mandated central funding mechanism or stringent nationwide enforcement architecture. Implementation often depends on state and municipal capacity, local budgets, and inter-departmental coordination.
• Statement 3 is correct. Persistent exposure to high temperatures and warmer nights imposes significant physiological stress. Heat increases cardiovascular strain, dehydration risk, and electrolyte imbalance, while also aggravating respiratory illnesses and kidney-related disorders, especially among vulnerable populations such as the elderly, outdoor workers, and urban poor.

Source

Solution: B

• The anti-defection framework under the Tenth Schedule is founded on the principle that an elected legislator continues to remain bound by the political party on whose ticket they were elected. The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly emphasized that the political party, not merely the legislative wing, is the central constitutional unit for purposes of defection law. Legislators cannot claim complete autonomy after election by arguing that the legislative faction is independent of the parent party.
• Option (a) is incorrect because the anti-defection law rejects the idea of absolute legislative autonomy after elections.
• Option (c) is incorrect because merger exemptions under Paragraph 4 of the Tenth Schedule require satisfaction of prescribed numerical thresholds, particularly the two-thirds requirement.
• Option (d) is incorrect because in Kihoto Hollohan v. Zachillhu, the Supreme Court held that the Speaker’s decisions under the Tenth Schedule are subject to judicial review, though generally after the decision is made.