Under the Constitution of India, all doubts and disputes arising in connection with the election of the President are inquired into and decided by which authority?

Introduction / Context:
The election of the President of India is a constitutional process that must be free from doubt and controversy. However, in any large electoral process, disputes or doubts may arise related to eligibility, counting, or procedure. The Constitution of India therefore specifies a clear authority to inquire into and decide such disputes. This question tests your knowledge of which institution is empowered to finally adjudicate all doubts and disputes connected with the presidential election.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• We are dealing with the election of the President of India under the Constitution.
• The question is specifically about doubts and disputes connected with this election.
• We assume that the options refer to real constitutional bodies such as the Supreme Court, Parliament and the Election Commission of India.
• We are looking for the body that has final and exclusive authority to decide such disputes.

Concept / Approach:
Article 71 of the Constitution of India clearly states that all doubts and disputes arising out of or in connection with the election of the President or Vice President shall be inquired into and decided by the Supreme Court. The decision of the Supreme Court in such matters is final. While the Election Commission of India conducts the election and Parliament participates through its members, it is not these bodies that adjudicate disputes. The Prime Minister also has no adjudicatory role in this context. Thus, the correct answer must be the Supreme Court of India as the constitutional authority entrusted with this function.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall that the Constitution separates functions such as conducting elections, making laws and adjudicating disputes. Step 2: The Election Commission of India conducts and supervises elections, but it does not act as the final court for disputes about the presidential election. Step 3: Parliament includes the elected representatives who form part of the electoral college for the President, but Parliament is not a court of law for election disputes. Step 4: The Prime Minister heads the Council of Ministers and leads the government but has no judicial power to decide disputes about the President election. Step 5: Article 71 specifies that all doubts and disputes related to the election of the President are decided by the Supreme Court of India. Step 6: Therefore, among the given options, the Supreme Court of India is the correct constitutional authority.

Verification / Alternative check:
A good way to verify this is to consider what would happen in case of a serious allegation, such as improper counting or ineligibility of a candidate for the presidency. In such a high constitutional matter, a neutral and highest judicial authority is needed so that the decision is accepted by all sides. The Supreme Court, being the highest court in India and the guardian of the Constitution, is the appropriate body. Constitutional commentaries and standard polity textbooks consistently state that Article 71 vests this power in the Supreme Court. There is no provision giving this power to Parliament or the Election Commission, which confirms that the Supreme Court is the correct answer.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A is wrong because the Election Commission of India conducts the election but does not act as the final adjudicator of disputes about the election of the President.
Option C is wrong because Parliament is part of the electoral college but has no constitutional role as a court for deciding presidential election disputes.
Option D is wrong because the Prime Minister is part of the executive branch and has no judicial or constitutional authority to decide such disputes.

Common Pitfalls:
Many learners confuse the body that conducts elections with the body that decides disputes arising from those elections. It is natural to think of the Election Commission first when elections are mentioned. However, when the issue is about legal disputes and constitutional doubts, one must think of the judiciary. Another common mistake is to overestimate the role of Parliament and the Prime Minister, assuming that they control all key political decisions. In constitutional law, roles are divided carefully, and this question is a classic example of the judiciary acting as the final referee in an important constitutional process.

Final Answer:
The Supreme Court of India