The correct option is It is detrimental to freedom
Explanation
The question pertains to the philosophical foundation of Fundamental Rights, specifically the tension between individual liberty and state authority. In a constitutional democracy, while rights are not absolute and are subject to "reasonable restrictions," the primary objective of Part III of the Constitution is to prevent the arbitrary or excessive exercise of power by the State.Analysis:
The phrase "habit of imposing restrictions" carries a negative connotation, implying a routine, unthinking, or excessive tendency by the authority to curtail rights, rather than applying restrictions only when strictly necessary and reasonable.
- It is detrimental to freedom is correct: A "habit" of restriction implies that the State prioritizes control over liberty as a default stance. In the context of liberal democratic principles and Fundamental Rights, such a tendency stifles individual autonomy and is fundamentally detrimental to the concept of freedom.
- It is necessary for a disciplined society is incorrect: While reasonable restrictions are necessary for public order and a disciplined society, a "habit" of imposing them suggests authoritarianism rather than necessary regulation.
- Options It ensures the longevity of the government and It is the hallmark of a developed nation are incorrect: The longevity of a government or the status of a developed nation is not predicated on the suppression of rights; rather, developed democracies typically exhibit robust protection of civil liberties.
Key Takeaway:
Fundamental Rights serve as a check on the tyranny of the executive and arbitrary laws of the legislature. While restrictions exist, they must be reasonable and specific, not a habitual exercise of power that erodes the essence of liberty.