Early Ideological and Federal Blueprints

The first and second statements are accurate; it inspired the Preamble and championed popular sovereignty. The third statement is false because the 1946 Objectives Resolution originally proposed a highly decentralized federal structure where residuary powers would be vested in the autonomous units (provinces), in a bid to keep the subcontinent united. (The shift to centralizing residuary powers happened later, after partition).

The Assertion is true; the early draft favored regional autonomy to prevent partition. Reason 1 correctly supports this by noting that residuary powers were to be vested in the provinces. Reason 2 is completely false because the Resolution fiercely championed popular sovereignty, explicitly declaring that all power and authority are derived from the people.

The first contradiction is verifiable. In a bid to prevent partition, the 1946 Objectives Resolution proposed a weak center where residuary powers would remain with autonomous provinces. Once partition happened, the framers reversed course, and the final 1950 Constitution vested residuary powers securely in the central Union parliament. The other scenarios are false as the 1946 draft already demanded a republic and minority safeguards.

Only two claims are verifiable (Statements 1 and 2). It inspired the Preamble and championed popular sovereignty. Statement 3 is false because the Resolution originally proposed decentralizing unenumerated (residuary) authority by vesting it in the provinces, not centralizing it.