We adopted parliamentary democracy based on the British model, but how does our model differ from that model? ​ 1. As regards legislation, the British Parliament is supreme or sovereign but in India, the power of the Parliament to legislate is limited. ​ 2. In India, matters related to the constitutionality of the Amendment of an Act of the Parliament are referred to the Constitution Bench by the Supreme Court. ​ Select the correct answer using the code given below. ​

Both statements are correct, so the answer is C.

Statement 1 is correct. The British Parliament is legally sovereign, and no court can strike down its Acts. The Indian Parliament works under a written Constitution that limits its legislative power. It must respect Part III (Fundamental Rights), the federal division of powers in the Seventh Schedule, and the basic structure doctrine from Kesavananda Bharati (1973). Judicial review under Articles 13, 32 and 226 is the check.

Statement 2 is correct in substance. Article 145(3) requires at least five judges to decide any case involving a substantial question of law on the interpretation of the Constitution. Challenges to the constitutional validity of laws, including constitutional amendments as in Kesavananda Bharati and the NJAC case, go to such benches. The wording is loose, since the reference is to validity of laws generally and not only to amendments, but the principle holds.

Core concept: parliamentary sovereignty versus constitutional supremacy. This links to GS2 on judicial review and the basic structure doctrine.

Trap: assuming that a parliamentary system automatically means Parliament is supreme in India, or rejecting statement 2 because Article 145(3) is not named in the question.