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.

Open in App

Solution

a. The statement is incorrect because the Constituent Assembly was elected by the members of the Provisional Legislative Assemblies. Members from every province and religious group were given representation in the assembly.

b. Incorrect. There were arguments and queries on most of the provisions. Each clause of the Constitution was subjected to scrutiny and debate. Leaders like Dr. Ambedkar, Pt. Nehru, Rajendra Prasad, Maulana Azad and Sardar Patel did not agree to many things.

c. Correct. It is a combination of French, Irish, British, Canadian and United States Constitution in a new form.

Suggest Corrections

Similar questions

Q. Q2) Consider the following statements about Indian constitution-

1. Constitution is a body of fundamental principles made by the constituent assembly.
2. Members of the constituent assembly were directly elected by means of universal suffrage.
3. Constitution has distributed power in such a way as to make it difficult to subvert it.
4. The constituent assembly did not represent the Indian people since it was not elected by all citizens
Which of the above following statements is/are correct?

Why is it said that the making of the Indian Constitution was unrepresentative? Does that make the Constitution unrepresentative? Give reasons for your answer.

Q. The assembly of elected representatives that drafted the Indian Constitution was known as the Constituent Assembly. Select the incorrect statement about the Constituent Assembly of India.

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?

Give two examples each to support the following conclusions about the Indian Constitution:

a. The Constitution was made by credible leaders who commanded peoples’ 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.

Join BYJU'S Learning Program