Polity · 2 Aug 2026

Anticipatory Bail

Consider the following Assertion (A) and Reason (R): Assertion (A): The Supreme Court stayed the arrest of former Tamil Nadu Minister V. Senthilbalaji in a DVAC corruption case, a day after the Madras High Court had denied him anticipatory bail on the same facts. Reason (R): Bail jurisprudence permits courts to weigh an accused's real-world capacity to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and the Supreme Court found this capacity had reduced following a change in the ruling party in Tamil Nadu. Select the correct answer using the codes given below:

ABoth A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A
BBoth A and R are true but R is NOT the correct explanation of A
CA is true but R is false
DA is false but R is true

Tests the ability to verify whether a court's stated reasoning genuinely and specifically supports its outcome, rather than merely recognising that both are factually true in isolation.

Subscribe / Login in App →
This question is based on: Same FIR, Same Facts - Different Government and Suddenly No Flight Risk
Take this in full test mode → Instructions for 2 Aug 2026
About this question

Why in news

The Supreme Court's order stands out for openly citing Tamil Nadu's change of government, rather than any new evidence, as the basis for reversing the High Court's anticipatory bail denial.

Why for UPSC

UPSC's Assertion-Reasoning format tests whether a stated outcome and its stated cause are genuinely and specifically linked, which is exactly the kind of close reading this case's own judicial reasoning demands.

Prelims summary

The Supreme Court's stay of arrest for V. Senthilbalaji was explicitly grounded in the reduced "malefic influence" following Tamil Nadu's 2026 change of government, not in any reassessment of the underlying evidence.

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.