IBPS GK Questions 2026

The correct answer is B, April 1935. The Reserve Bank of India started working on 1 April 1935 under the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, following the recommendation of the Hilton Young Commission of 1926. It began as a privately owned shareholders' bank with its central office in Calcutta, which moved permanently to Bombay (Mumbai) in 1937. Its first Governor was Sir Osborne Smith, and C. D. Deshmukh became the first Indian Governor in 1943. The bank was nationalised on 1 January 1949, after which it has been fully owned by the Government of India. A is wrong because nothing about the RBI's founding happened in April 1948; 1949 is the nationalisation year. C is wrong because April 1945 was still wartime and the bank had already existed for ten years. D is wrong because April 1936 is a year too late; the bank had already completed its first year. Exam tip: RBI Act 1934, RBI born 1 April 1935, nationalised 1 January 1949.

The correct answer is G. Kishan Reddy, the Union Minister of Coal and Mines, who was the Chief Guest at the function. This question is hard precisely because every option names a person who was actually present, so each must be tied to the right role. Dr Sukanta Majumdar, the Minister of State for Education and for the Development of the North Eastern Region, graced the occasion as the Special Guest, which is a different designation from Chief Guest. Hansraj Ahir, former Chairman of the National Commission for Backward Classes, presided over the ceremony rather than attending as its guest. Former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai was present on the occasion but is not described as holding either of the guest roles. Reading the roles carefully is the whole skill being tested here, and the same care pays off in questions about any award ceremony.

The correct answer is the Sansad Ratna Awards 2026. The release states that the award was presented during the sixteenth edition of the Sansad Ratna Awards, held at the Dr Ambedkar International Centre in the national capital, and it adds that the jury of the Sansad Ratna Awards Committee recognised the service of the Commission to the nation and to the cause of social justice. The same committee, along with the Prime Point Foundation, also nominated him for the honour. The other three names in the options have been built to sound like plausible award ceremonies, but none of them appears in the release. Candidates should carry the surrounding details as well, since questions are often framed around them: the Chief Guest was Union Minister of Coal and Mines G. Kishan Reddy, and former Chief Justice B. R. Gavai was present on the occasion.

The correct answer is the National Commission for Scheduled Castes. The release identifies Kishor Makwana as the Chairman of the NCSC and says the award recognises his dedicated service to that Commission and his contribution to advancing social justice, adding that the Commission has strengthened its role in safeguarding the constitutional rights of the Scheduled Castes under his leadership. Option A is the sharpest distractor, because the National Commission for Backward Classes does appear in the release, but in a different role: the ceremony was presided over by Hansraj Ahir, a former Chairman of that Commission. Option C and option D are national bodies that a candidate may confuse with the right one, yet neither is mentioned here. It is worth fixing the pairing in memory as a set, namely the recipient, the Commission he heads, and the award named after the former President of India.

The correct answer is 24. The release states in its headline and again in the opening paragraph that the operations resulted in the arrest of 24 persons, including three foreign nationals. Option B is the trickiest distractor, because the figure 22 does appear in the release, but it is the number of foreign-origin gold bars concealed in a box beneath the gearbox of a car in the Chandauli case, not a count of people. The arrests were spread across the cases: one man who owned the melting and die-cutting unit in Delhi, one from the vehicle intercepted coming from Punjab, one near the Indo-Bangladesh border, a passenger and his associate at Howrah, five in the Mumbai airport syndicate, two in the treadmill case including a Chinese national, six at Chennai and two at Calicut. Keep the headline trio together: about 41 kg of gold, about Rs 62 crore in value, 24 arrests.

The correct answer is the Border Security Force. The release records that the DRI, acting in coordination with the BSF, seized 89 pieces of foreign-origin gold bars weighing around 11.3 kg from a person near the Indo-Bangladesh border at BOP Halderpara, and that the man, unable to produce documents of lawful possession, admitted his involvement and was arrested. The other options are real central armed police forces, but their names do not appear in this release, and only one other police agency is mentioned anywhere in it, namely the police of Chandauli in Uttar Pradesh, who worked with the DRI in the case of the bars hidden beneath the gearbox of a car. Candidates should remember that the same set of operations covered airports, rail routes and the land border, and that the total came to around 41 kg of gold worth about Rs 62 crore.

The correct answer is the Customs Act, 1962. The release names this statute twice in the same episode near the Indo-Bangladesh border, saying that because the person could not produce documents for lawful possession the gold was seized under the Customs Act, and that he was arrested under the relevant provisions of the same Act. The statute appears again in the case from Chandauli in Uttar Pradesh, where the occupants of a car could not show lawful possession of 22 recovered bars. The other three options name genuine laws that candidates often associate with economic offences, and that is exactly why they have been placed here, but none of them is mentioned in this release. Smuggling of goods across the customs frontier is dealt with under customs law, which is why the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, functioning under the Ministry of Finance, proceeds under this Act.

The correct answer is 237. The release carries this as one of its headline findings, stating that in 237 districts women constitute one-third of the total workforce in the unincorporated sector. Every other option is also a real figure from the same release, which is what makes this question difficult, so each one must be attached to the right fact. The figure 280 is the number of districts where gross value added per worker exceeds the all-India average of Rs 1,56,539. The figure 331 is the approximate number of districts where gross value added per worker lies between one lakh and one and a half lakh rupees. The figure 25 is the number of districts where women make up more than half of the workforce. Two related findings are worth adding: the districts with the highest share of women-led establishments lie in Telangana, Manipur and Meghalaya, and in Mizoram at least half the establishments in every district are owned by women.

The correct answer is 757. The release says that estimates of the indicators are given for 757 out of the 770 districts available in the sampling frame at the time the ASUSE sample was selected. Option C is the sharpest distractor precisely because that figure also appears in the release, but it is the size of the sampling frame and not the number of districts actually shown, so the two must be kept apart. The gap between the two numbers is explained in the release itself. Lakshadweep and Chandigarh each have a single district, so their district estimates coincide with their union territory estimates and were already published. Delhi is excluded for a different reason, namely that its rural population is very small and its villages few, so all its districts were merged into one stratum and district estimates could not be generated. Options A and D do not appear anywhere in the release.

The correct answer is the Annual Survey of Unincorporated Sector Enterprises 2025, abbreviated as ASUSE 2025. The release states that the report, titled Unincorporated Sector at the District Level, draws upon ASUSE data to present the scale, structure and economic performance of the sector district by district, and that this is the first initiative of the National Statistics Office to disseminate district-level estimates from a large-scale nationwide survey. The other three surveys named in the options are genuine statistical exercises, which makes them convincing distractors, but none of them is mentioned in this release and none supplies these estimates. Remember the supporting details as well: the survey covers rural and urban areas across the country, it takes in manufacturing, trade and other services, and the data were collected on tablets using computer assisted personal interviewing, with relative standard errors reported so that users can judge reliability.

The correct answer is the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The release states that the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020 were notified under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and that they provide the framework for safeguarding consumers against unfair trade practices in the e-commerce sector; the amendment of 2026 strengthens that same framework. The other three statutes are real laws that a candidate may associate loosely with online business, but none of them is named in this release, and attributing the rules to them would be wrong. The chain worth memorising runs in one line: the Act of 2019 is the parent, the Rules of 2020 sit under it, the Amendment Rules of 2026 modify those rules, and the whole package takes effect from the first day of 2027. Also remember that the administering authority named here is the Department of Consumer Affairs.

The correct answer is 30 days. The amended rules provide that where a price reduction is announced, both the reduced price and the prior price shall be displayed, and they define the prior price as the lowest price at which the goods or services were offered during the thirty days preceding the announcement. The point of the provision is to stop the familiar trick of quietly raising a price and then advertising a discount from the inflated figure, because the reference point is now the lowest price in a fixed window rather than a figure of the seller choosing. The other options are periods that do not appear in the release. Candidates should tie this provision to the neighbouring ones in the same list, namely the ban on manipulating search results in a way that misleads users and the requirement that sponsored listings be identified through clear and prominent disclosures.

The correct answer is 1 January 2027. The release says in its headline points, and repeats at the very end, that the new rules shall come into force from January 1, 2027, which gives e-commerce entities a clear runway before compliance becomes mandatory. The three wrong options are all dates that sound administratively plausible, and this is precisely the trap: a candidate who remembers only that the amendment was made in 2026 may assume it applies at once, and pick the October date. It is worth separating the two years cleanly in memory. The amending instrument is titled the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) (Amendment) Rules, 2026, because that is the year it was made, but the date of commencement falls in the following year. The rules it amends are the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules, 2020, which were notified under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

The correct answer is 50. Listing the achievements of the cooperation period that has just ended, the release records the launch in 2024 of the ASEAN-India Fellowship for Higher Education in Agriculture and Allied Sciences, which provides for 50 master’s fellowships over five years for students from ASEAN member states. The other options are numbers that fit the shape of such a scheme but are not supported by the release, and a candidate who guesses will very likely pick one of them. Two further details from the same list are worth carrying into the examination hall alongside this figure: the ASEAN-India Millets Festivals were held at Jakarta and New Delhi in 2023 to promote dietary diversification, nutrition and climate-resilient crops, and the joint leaders statement on strengthening food security and nutrition in response to crises also belongs to this period of cooperation.

The correct answer is 2026-2030. The meeting looked forward to the adoption and implementation of the medium-term plan of action for cooperation in agriculture and forestry for 2026-2030, and the release sets out its four mutually reinforcing areas, namely policy dialogue with food security, trade, investment and resilient value chains; institutional networking, information exchange and digital innovation; capacity building, technology cooperation and joint research and development; and human-resource development with farmer exchanges and inclusive rural enterprise. Option A, 2021-2025, is the period of the plan that was being closed out, and the release praises the progress made under it, so it describes the past and not the future. Option C and option D are periods that do not appear anywhere in the release and have been placed here only to test whether the candidate has memorised the exact span. Note also that the same years, 2026-2030, cover the ASEAN sectoral plan for food, agriculture and forestry welcomed at this meeting.

The correct answer is New Delhi. The release opens by saying that the Ninth ASEAN-India Ministerial Meeting on Agriculture and Forestry was held on 9 September 2026 in New Delhi, India, and it closes with the ministers thanking the Government of India for the hospitality and the arrangements made for the meeting, which confirms India as the host. Option A, Jakarta, is a trap for the hurried reader, because Jakarta does appear in the release, but only as one of the two cities where the ASEAN-India Millets Festivals were held in 2023, the other being New Delhi. Option B, Manila, is not named anywhere; the Philippines is mentioned because the co-chair from the ASEAN side was its Agriculture Secretary, not because the meeting was held there. Option D, Bangkok, does not figure in the release at all. Candidates should link the ninth edition firmly with New Delhi and the tenth edition with the year 2028.

The correct answer is Chandrayaan-3. Recalling the landmarks of the Indian space programme, the Prime Minister said that Chandrayaan-3 made India the first nation to land near the lunar south pole, and he presented that touchdown as a benchmark for the world. Option A, Chandrayaan-2, is not credited with this achievement anywhere in the release, and the only lunar mission it names in this context is the third one, so the answer cannot be shifted to the earlier mission. Option C, Aditya-L1, is named in the same passage but for an entirely different purpose: it is described as unlocking the secrets of the Sun, which makes it a solar observation mission rather than a lunar one. Option D, Gaganyaan, does not appear in the release at all; what the address does mention is that an Indian astronaut visited the International Space Station in the previous year, which is a separate fact and not a mission name.

The correct answer is 2035. While outlining the road map for the country, the Prime Minister announced plans to establish an indigenous space station by 2035 and to send an astronaut to the Moon by 2040. These are the only two forward-looking dates given in the release, and the earlier of the two belongs to the space station. Option C, 2040, is a very tempting distractor because that year does appear in the release, but it is attached to the crewed lunar mission and not to the station, so a candidate who mixes up the two loses the mark. Option A, 2030, does not appear in the release at all and has simply been placed there because it looks like a plausible round-number goal. Option D, 2045, is likewise absent from the account of the address. The safest way to hold this pair in memory is as a sequence: the station comes first, the Moon landing follows five years later.

The correct answer is Paris. The release states that the Prime Minister addressed the International Space Summit held in Paris, France, and that he joined the gathering through video conference. He thanked President Emmanuel Macron for the timely initiative behind the summit and for the gracious invitation extended to him, and he described it as the first summit of its kind. His closing appeal was framed around the city itself, asking that the Space Summit in Paris send out a clear message that nations will explore, innovate and protect space together. Berlin is therefore wrong, because the release makes no mention of Germany or of any German city in connection with this meeting. Rome is wrong for the same reason, as Italy does not figure anywhere in the account of the summit. Madrid is wrong as well, since Spain is not named at any point. Only France, its capital and its President appear in the release, which makes Paris the single defensible option here.

The correct answer is 2047. The President said the country is moving ahead with the national goal of building a developed India by that year, a hundred years after independence, and described what such a country would look like: quality education and healthcare reaching everyone, science and technology used for human welfare, equality of opportunity, full use of the potential of women and youth, and a life of dignity for every citizen. She added that universities and young people have an important role in reaching these goals. Options A, B and C name earlier years that are sometimes attached to other national targets, such as energy or climate commitments, but the Viksit Bharat goal is fixed to the centenary year of independence. Candidates should attach the year firmly to the phrase, because it recurs in scheme and speech questions alike.