Model Questions for UPSC PRE CSAT PAPER SET - 17
Passage: Instruction for question- read the following passage and answer
the questions that follow. Your answers to the questions should be based on the
passage only.
President Pranab Mukherjee’s decision to reject the mercy petition submitted
by the lone convict in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, Mohammed Ajmal Kasab, is
an instance of how public perceptions about a convict’s guilt can camouflage the
government’s duty to explain the decision. The President’s decision is shrouded
in secrecy, throwing little light on the principles which guided it.
Under Section 4(1) (d) of the Right to Information Act, every public authority
shall provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to
affected persons. This provision has no exemptions. The government erroneously
denies information to RTI applicants seeking reasons for its mercy decisions,
taking shelter under Article 74(2) which Only bars inquiries by courts into
Ministers’ advice to the President.
The last hanging in India was that of Dhananjoy Chatterjee in 2004. One of the
journalists has found from MHA files under the RTI-Act that the briefs prepared
for President Kalam provided an inaccurate and incomplete view of the 10-year
delay in his execution, ignoring official negligence. He suggests that a
reasoned and transparent decision could have made it easy for the Supreme Court
to intervene on the ground that relevant material was not placed before the
President, before executing Chatterjee.
President Pranab Mukherjee missed an excellent opportunity to contribute to the
rule of law, by not publicly disclosing the reasons for his decision on Kasab.
Every death row convict has an inherent right under Article 21even if so far
untested by the Courts - to be apprised of the reasons for the rejection of his
mercy petition, which would deprive him of his life. Others are entitled to know
the reasons as well under the RTI Act.
1. According to the passage
1. The government is trying to neglect its duty of disclosing the reason
behind the rejection of mercy petition of Ajmal Kasab by hiding under the public
perception of his guilt.
2. Ajmal Kasab, the lone convict of 26/11 Mumbai terror attack should not have
been hanged secretly.
3. The President’s decision to reject Kasab’s mercy petition doesn’t throw any
light behind the reason of his doing so.
4. Now a days prosecutions are guided by media and public perceptions.
(a) Only 1 and 2
(b) Only 1 and 3
(c) Only 1, 2, 3
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4
2. According to the passage the government is shying away from its duty to
reveal the reason behind its mercy decisions under the ambit of
1. Public perception, as in the case of Ajmal Kasab’s guilt.
2. Article 74(2), which falls under public domain.
(a) Only 1
(b) Only 2
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
3. Information from MHA files under RTI Act reveals a lacuna behind the
execution of Dhananjoy Chatterjee in 2004. This lacuna pertains to
(a) Non intervention of Supreme Court in the matter.
(b) Hanging of Dhananjoy Chatterjee could have been commuted to life
imprisonment on timely intervention of Supreme-Court.
(c) An inaccurate and incomplete view of the 10year delay in his execution was
presented before the President to decide upon his mercy petition.
(d) A reasoned and transparent decision was made by the President in reviewing
his mercy petition.
4. Consider the following statement
1. As per Article 21 a death row convict and general public are entitled to
know the reason behind the rejection of his mercy petition.
2. Article 74(2) undermines the RTI Act.
(a) Only 1
(b) Only 2
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Passage: Instruction for question- read the following passage and answer
the questions that follow. Your answers to the questions should be based on the
passage only.
Despite India’s rapid economic development and growing technological prowess,
it continues to suffer from widespread poverty and bears a burden of infectious
diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria and many other neglected diseases. The
country will have to strengthen its health system to reduce this burden and make
medicines accessible, especially for the poor, a latest report on India’s
research and development has said.
New health technologies-such as affordable and locally adapted drugs, vaccines
and diagnostics can also make a big contribution to combating disease in India.
For some serious diseases, there are currently no effective drugs or vaccines,
whereas for others, existing technologies are too expensive and require
infrastructure that is not broadly available, or are ill suited in other ways to
local needs. For instance there are no vaccines against malaria or dengue fever
and no affordable and accurate point-of care tests for tuberculosis ‘India’s
Role in Global Health R&D - a report by the Results for Development Institute
under its Centre for Global Health Research and Development Policy Assessment
programme - suggests that the capacity of Indian firms and of the Indian
biomedical system as a whole to create and bring new health technologies to
market is still limited. Indian firms require subsidy of some kind to work on
products with very small markets, such as leishmaniasis or typhoid fever. Also,
there is a class of neglected but useful disease products that these firms see
as commercially viable.
Indian firms are most able to contribute in three ways: by developing more
affordable or locally adapted versions of existing products; by bringing to
market some new products for which technological barriers are not too high; and
by participating in specific aspects of international product development
initiatives in areas where they have a cost or other advantage.
5. Consider the following statement with reference to the passage
1. New health technologies-such as affordable and locally available drugs,
vaccines and diagnostics are helping India in combating diseases like malaria
and tuberculosis.
2. There is a need for subsidy of some sort for Indian firms to develop products
that can combat less prevalent diseases.
(a) Only 1
(b) Only 2
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
