Assertion (A): In India, every State has a High Court in its territory.

Correct Option

Assertion (A) states that every State in India has a High Court in its territory. This statement is factually incorrect. The Indian judicial system provides for common High Courts that can serve two or more States, or a State and a Union Territory. For instance:

• The Punjab and Haryana High Court exercises jurisdiction over both Punjab and Haryana, along with the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
• The Bombay High Court has jurisdiction over Maharashtra, Goa, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, and Daman and Diu.
• The Guwahati High Court serves multiple North-Eastern states, including Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, and Arunachal Pradesh.

Therefore, Assertion (A) is false.

Reason (R) states that the Constitution of India provides a High Court in each State. This statement is true. Article 214 of the Constitution explicitly mandates, "There shall be a High Court for each State." This constitutional provision ensures that every State has access to the jurisdiction of a High Court. It implies a High Court 'for' each State, guaranteeing judicial oversight, but does not strictly require an exclusive, physically separate High Court located within the territorial boundaries of every single state.

Therefore, Reason (R) is true.

Since Assertion (A) is false and Reason (R) is true, Option (D) is the correct choice.

Incorrect Options

Options (A) and (B) are incorrect because Assertion (A) is false. Both options premise on 'A' being individually true.

Option (C) is incorrect because Reason (R) is true, not false, as per Article 214 of the Constitution.