Raj was convicted for torturing his wife for dowry. Suresh was held guilty of
practicing untouchability. The court did not allow either of them to contest elections.
Does this decision go against the principles of democratic elections? Justify.
Answers
☆Given Question:-
- Raj was convicted for torturing his wife for dowry.
- Suresh was held guilty of practicing untouchability.
The court did not allow either of them to contest elections. Does this decision go against the principles of democratic elections? Justify.
☆Required Answer:-
Does this decision go against the principles of democratic elections?
Answer:- No, this decision does not go against the principles of democratic elections.
☆Justification:-
- Raj was convicted for torturing his wife for dowry.
What Raj did is wrong. Dowry is a punishable offence. Section 304B was added to the Indian Penal Code which said that dowry is punishable where a person can get 7 years imprisonment or imprisoned for the life.
- Suresh was held guilty of practicing untouchability.
The desicion taken here is wrong. It is because practicing untouchability is a crime. According to article 17, untouchability is abolished, and it shouldn't be practiced. Person who will be practicing untouchability will get punishment as per the law which is 6-month Imprisonment.
So, the above answer justifies that what Raj did was wrond, whereas Suresh did was wrong but he was said as guilty. The court took correct desicion to not allow either of them to contest elections. These people doing crimes have no rights to be in this society. This decision does not go against the principles of democratic elections.
-------------------------------------
Answer:
This decision does not go against the principles of democratic elections as both Raj and Suresh are criminals, and hence, should be prevented from holding positions in the central or state assemblies.