Polity · 8 Aug 2026

FCRA Amendment Bill 2026

Consider the following pairs: List I (Term/Case) - List II (Correct Description) 1. Designated Authority (FCRA Amendment Bill, 2026) - Vested with powers equivalent to a civil court over NGO assets 2. Noel Harper v. Union of India (2022) - Upheld the constitutional validity of the 2020 FCRA amendments 3. FCRA registration lapse or non-renewal - Requires proven wrongdoing before asset-vesting proceedings can begin 4. FCRA Amendment Bill, 2026 (as per government assurance) - Has no retrospective application How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?

AOnly one pair
BOnly two pairs
COnly three pairs
DAll four pairs

Tests whether aspirants can identify that a procedural lapse - not proven wrongdoing - is sufficient to trigger a serious legal consequence, a distinction requiring careful reading rather than surface recall.

Subscribe / Login in App →
About this question

Why in news

Amid Christian organisations' concerns over the FCRA Amendment Bill, 2026, Home Minister Amit Shah assured delegations the Bill was "religion-neutral," but the core structural objection - a Designated Authority's civil-court powers without judicial oversight - remains unaddressed.

Why for UPSC

This question isolates the single most important legal nuance in the article - that asset-vesting can be triggered by procedural non-renewal, not just proven violation - a distinction UPSC-style questions often hide inside a plausible-sounding but wrong "match."

Prelims summary

The FCRA Amendment Bill's Designated Authority holds civil-court powers over NGO assets and this can be triggered by mere non-renewal or lapse of registration, not just proven violation - a structural due-process gap the government's "non-retrospective, religion-neutral" assurances do not resolve.

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.