Legislative Supremacy over Civic Membership

The second and third statements are accurate. The automatic termination of citizenship is suspended during wartime, and Parliament (via Article 11) holds exclusive power over citizenship laws. The first statement is false because the Constitution itself only identified who became citizens at its commencement in 1950; the exhaustive, detailed criteria for ongoing acquisition and loss were left to Parliament, which subsequently passed the Citizenship Act of 1955.

The Assertion is true; the Constitution's citizenship chapters are surprisingly brief and only cover the 1950 commencement. Reason 1 correctly supports this by identifying Article 11, which delegates full ongoing power to Parliament. Reason 2 is completely false; citizenship is fiercely guarded as a matter of domestic sovereign legislation, not surrendered to international treaties.

The second status is correct. While acquiring foreign citizenship normally results in the automatic termination of Indian citizenship, this specific provision is explicitly suspended during a war in which India is engaged. This allows the Indian government to maintain legal jurisdiction over the individual to manage potential espionage or treason without them hiding behind a sudden loss of civic status.

Only two claims are valid (Statements 2 and 3: wartime suspension of termination, and Parliament's absolute monopoly under Article 11). Statement 1 is false because the exhaustive modern framework (naturalization/registration) is not in the original constitutional text; it is located within the parliamentary Citizenship Act of 1955.