Which Committee identified the existence of legal provisions for implementation of some of the Fundamental Duties?

Correct — B. The Justice J S Verma Committee, set up in 1999 on the operationalisation of Fundamental Duties, reported that legal provisions already existed for enforcing several of the duties in Article 51A.

Its point was that the duties are not decorative. Statutes such as the Protection of Civil Rights Act, the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act and the Wildlife (Protection) Act already give teeth to particular duties.

That finding — existing law, not new law — is the phrase the stem lifts, and the committee is option (b).

Why the others are wrong

• (a)
  Justice Mulla Committee — The Justice A N Mulla Committee was the All India Committee on Jail Reforms of the early 1980s. Its subject was prisons and prisoners, not the duties of citizens.
• (c)
  Justice Sapre Committee — No committee by the name Sapre is attached to the Fundamental Duties review in the standard polity syllabus. It is a plausible-sounding judicial name, offered to test whether Verma is actually fixed in your memory rather than merely familiar.
• (d)
  Justice VR Krishna Iyer Committee — Justice V R Krishna Iyer is remembered for prison reform and legal aid jurisprudence as a Supreme Court judge. He is a real name doing decoy work here, because the Fundamental Duties review is not his.

Fundamental Duties sit in Part IVA, in the single Article 51A, inserted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976 on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee. Ten duties were listed then, and an eleventh, on providing education to a child aged six to fourteen, was added by the 86th Amendment in 2002.

The duties are not directly enforceable by courts, but Parliament may provide for their enforcement by law — and it is precisely that gap that the Verma Committee examined.

Key facts

• The Justice J S Verma Committee of 1999 identified existing legal provisions for implementing some Fundamental Duties.
• Fundamental Duties are in Part IVA, Article 51A, inserted by the 42nd Amendment in 1976.
• The Swaran Singh Committee recommended the inclusion of Fundamental Duties in the Constitution.
• There were ten duties originally, and the eleventh, on education for children aged six to fourteen, came with the 86th Amendment in 2002.

Common traps

• The Swaran Singh Committee recommended the duties, while the Verma Committee reviewed how they could be implemented, and the two are often swapped.
• The same jurist chaired the 2013 criminal law committee, so the name alone does not settle which report is meant.
• Fundamental Duties are non-justiciable in themselves, which is not the same as being unenforceable through ordinary statutes.

No directly related past PYQ was found.