Ethics · 24 Jul 2026

proportionality principle police use of force

Consider the following statements regarding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) controversy in West Bengal:

  1. The Supreme Court's Bihar SIR judgment held that the Election Commission's citizenship-verification power is limited strictly to electoral roll purposes.
  2. West Bengal's May 2026 notification tied Annapurna Yojana eligibility to a person's SIR appeal status.
  3. As of the Supreme Court's notice, more than half of the appeals filed against SIR outcomes in West Bengal had been disposed of.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

AOnly one
BOnly two
COnly three
DAll four

Tests the ability to correctly separate distinct ethical frameworks (proportionality, deontology, consequentialism) as applied to a single scenario, rather than treating them as interchangeable justifications.

Subscribe / Login in App →
This question is based on: When Enfranchisement Becomes a Gatekeeper for Survival
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 24 Jul 2026
About this question

Why in news

An autorickshaw driver was killed by police fire in Doda, Jammu and Kashmir, during an alleged weapon-snatch scuffle, raising a GS4 question of where a defensive duty toward officers ends and a duty of precision toward bystanders begins.

Why for UPSC

GS4 case-study questions on police use-of-force routinely test whether aspirants can correctly separate proportionality, consequentialist reasoning and deontological duty rather than treating all justificatory frameworks as interchangeable.

Prelims summary

Proportionality requires force matched to actual threat; a rigorous deontological view treats the duty to protect officers and the duty of precision toward bystanders as separate obligations - one does not automatically justify overriding the other.

On web, answers are shown once after a test — no save or reattempt. For unlimited reattempts, Hindi medium, and Mentor Observations, use the TAN App.