Consider the following statements : Assertion (A) : Dr. Ambedkar had describe Article 32 of Constitution as the very soul of it. Reason (R) : Article 32 of Provides effective remedy against the violation of Fundamental Rights. Select the correct answer using the cods given below: Codes:

Both statements are true, and the reason explains the assertion. In the Constituent Assembly on 9 December 1948, Dr. Ambedkar called Article 32 the 'heart and soul' of the Constitution, and the reason gives the basis for that view. Article 32 is in Part III and lets any person move the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of Fundamental Rights through writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari and quo warranto. Without an enforceable remedy, Fundamental Rights would be mere declarations, which is why Ambedkar treated it as the guarantee of all other rights.

Why the other options fail:

• B is wrong because the reason is the explanation. Ambedkar's point was precisely that the remedy makes the rights real.
• C is wrong because the reason is a correct statement of the function of Article 32.
• D is wrong because the assertion is an accurate quote-based claim.

Concept: Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right, and the Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction under it is the core of constitutional remedies. Mains connection: GS-II on the role of the judiciary, and the difference between Article 32 (only for Fundamental Rights, Supreme Court) and Article 226 (wider scope, High Courts).

Trap: Aspirants often mark B by treating the reason as a mere restatement of the assertion. Check whether the reason actually explains the assertion. Here it does.