Which one of the following statements about the Attorney-General of India is NOT correct?

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 73 (CAPF/2020)

Which one of the following statements about the Attorney-General of India is NOT correct?

question_subject: 

Polity

question_exam: 

CAPF

stats: 

0,84,26,7,84,6,13

keywords: 

{'attorney': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'supreme court': [12, 1, 4, 14], 'general': [7, 3, 8, 4], 'president': [4, 0, 2, 1], 'judge': [6, 1, 14, 17], 'india': [8, 1, 7, 13], 'high courts': [3, 0, 1, 2]}

The Attorney-General of India is a very important position in the Indian legal system. Let`s dissect each option to understand why option 2 is not correct.

Option 1 states that the person must be qualified to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court. This means that the Attorney-General must possess the qualifications required for a person to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court. This is correct.

Option 2 states that the Attorney-General enjoys the right of audience only in the Supreme Court and High Courts in India. However, this is not correct. The Attorney-General has the right of audience in any court in India. This includes courts other than the Supreme Court and High Courts.

Option 3 states that the Attorney-General holds office during the pleasure of the President. This means that the President can remove the Attorney-General from office at any time. This is correct.

Option 4 states that the Attorney-General receives remuneration as determined by the President. This means that the President determines the salary and allowances of the Attorney-General. This is correct.

In conclusion, while options 1, 3, and 4 are correct statements about the Attorney-General of India, option 2 is not correct. The Attorney-General has the right of audience in any court in

Practice this on app