With reference to the federal system in India, which of the statements is/are correct? 1) States have no right to secede from the Union under the Constitution of India. 2) Just advocacy of secession will have the protection of freedom of expression. Select the correct answer from the codes given below:

The correct answer is A (1 only). Statement 1 is correct and Statement 2 is wrong.

• Statement 1 is correct. Article 1 describes India as a Union of States, and the Constitution does not give any state a right to secede. The Union is often described as an indestructible union of destructible states. Unlike the old Soviet model, the federation here is not a compact of sovereign units that can walk out.
• Statement 2 is wrong. The Sixteenth Constitutional Amendment Act, 1963, added 'sovereignty and integrity of India' as a ground of reasonable restriction under Article 19(2). Advocacy of secession therefore does not get the protection of Article 19(1)(a). The same Act also made every MP, MLA and public servant swear allegiance to the sovereignty and integrity of India in the oath under the Third Schedule.

The core concept here is the nature of Indian federalism: a federal polity with a strong Union and an indestructible territorial integrity. This links directly to Mains questions on centre-state relations, asymmetric federalism and the limits of free speech.

Trap: Many aspirants assume that because India is federal, states can exit like the constituent units of a classic federation, or they read 'freedom of expression' too broadly and treat every political speech as protected.