Who/Which of the following is the custodian of the Constitution of India?

Shows a concrete power under Article 370 where the President issues orders applying the Constitution to a State, implying a role in implementing constitutional provisions.

A student could check other constitutional provisions where the President issues orders or notifications to see if this implementation role resembles 'custodianship'.

States that the Constitution vests the executive power of the Union formally in the President and calls the President the constitutional head of the executive.

One could contrast 'formal vesting' with who actually enforces or interprets the Constitution (e.g., courts) to assess whether formal head implies 'custodian'.

Reiterates that executive power is formally vested in the President though exercised through the Council of Ministers, highlighting a ceremonial/formal versus practical distinction.

A student might use this to distinguish symbolic custodial roles from effective guardianship exercised by other organs (like judiciary).

Explains the President's legislative powers as a component of Parliament (similar to the Crown), indicating institutional placement in constitutional machinery.

Compare this institutional placement with the functions typically associated with a 'custodian' (e.g., protecting, interpreting, enforcing) to evaluate the claim.

Presents an exam question listing the President and the Supreme Court as options for 'custodian of the Constitution', showing the question is contested and both are considered plausible by study material.

A student could use this to prompt examination of arguments for each organ (President vs Supreme Court) using constitutional text and roles.

The Prime Minister's oath includes swearing 'to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India' and to act in accordance with the Constitution.

A student could combine this with the general idea that custodianship implies a duty to protect/uphold the Constitution and ask whether taking such an oath implies formal custodianship or only personal/official duty.

Describes the Prime Minister as head of government with wide-ranging and final decision-making powers within the Cabinet.

One could extend this by comparing 'de facto executive authority' with the notion of a constitutional custodian — i.e., does executive control equal custodianship of the constitutional order?

States the PM is the de facto executive, leads the Council of Ministers, advises the President and shapes national policies.

A student might weigh whether leading the executive and advising the President implies custodial responsibility for the Constitution versus other branches sharing that role.

Explains constitutional limits on the President and that executive powers must be exercised according to the Constitution (mentions Article 74(1) and Article 75(1)).

Using this, one could infer a pattern: constitutional actors (President, ministers) are bound by constitutional rules — prompting a check of which organ has explicit constitutional guardianship or interpretive authority.

Contains an exam-style question listing possible 'custodians of the Constitution' including the President, Prime Minister, Lok Sabha Secretariat, and Supreme Court.

A student could use this as a checklist of candidate institutions/bodies to investigate further (e.g., which of these has roles/words in the Constitution indicating custodianship).

This snippet records a UPSC-style question asking 'Who/Which of the following is the custodian of the Constitution of India?' with options including the Lok Sabha Secretariat and the Supreme Court.

A student could note that competitive-exam questions often contrast legislative administration (Lok Sabha Secretariat) with judicial bodies (Supreme Court) and then check basic sources on which institution is conventionally described as 'custodian' (e.g., role of apex court).

Defines the composition of Parliament as President, Council of States (Rajya Sabha) and House of the People (Lok Sabha), implying the Lok Sabha Secretariat is an administrative organ linked to the legislature.

Knowing the Secretariat is an administrative/secretarial organ of a legislative house, a student can contrast administrative custody with constitutional guardianship (usually a judicial function) using basic civics knowledge.

Describes specific constitutional powers of the Lok Sabha (money bills, responsibility of Council of Ministers), showing the Lok Sabha's role is legislative and political.

From the Lok Sabha's legislative/political functions a student could infer that 'custodian of the Constitution' would more likely be an institution with interpretative/enforcement authority (suggesting comparison with judiciary).

Explains limits and special powers between Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, reinforcing that parliamentary organs have defined legislative roles rather than explicit constitutional guardianship.

A student could combine this pattern with the general idea that constitutional guardianship is typically vested in bodies that interpret and enforce constitutional provisions (e.g., higher courts) to test the statement.

States that Rajya Sabha represents states and Lok Sabha the people, emphasising the representative/legislative character of both houses.

Using the representative/legislative character as a rule, a student could rule out administrative legislative organs as primary 'custodians' and instead look to institutions with constitutional adjudicatory roles.