Sovereign Empowerment and Dual Institutional Functionality

The first and third statements are accurate. The 1947 Act made the Assembly fully sovereign (able to alter British law), and it indeed had two Vice-Presidents (Mukherjee and Krishnamachari). The second statement is false because after the partition plan was accepted, Muslim League members from territories falling within the Indian Dominion did enter the Assembly. The fourth statement is false because G.V. Mavlankar chaired the Assembly when it met as a legislative body (Dr. Sachchidanand Sinha was merely the temporary President of the very first meeting).

The Assertion is true; the Assembly separated its dual roles via different chairmen. Reason 1 correctly identifies Dr. Rajendra Prasad as the chair of the constituent (drafting) sessions. Reason 2 is historically false because the legislative sessions (passing ordinary laws) were chaired by G.V. Mavlankar, not Dr. Sachchidanand Sinha.

The second status is correct. Following the acceptance of the Mountbatten partition plan, members of the Muslim League who were elected from areas that remained within the Indian Dominion did enter the Indian Constituent Assembly and participated in its proceedings, abandoning the earlier total boycott.

Three claims are valid (Statements 1, 3, and 4). It had sovereign power to abrogate laws, it had two Vice-Presidents (Mukherjee and Krishnamachari), and Mavlankar chaired the legislative sessions. Statement 2 is false because Muslim League members from the Indian Dominion did enter and participate in the Assembly.