This is a passage
The young lift man in a City office who threw a passenger out of the lift the other morning and
was fined for the offence was undoubtedly in the wrong. It was a question of “Please.” The complaint
entering the lift, said, “Top” The left man demanded “Top-please,” and this concession being refused
he not only declined to comply with the instruction, but hurled the passenger out of the lift. This, of
course was carrying a comment on manner too far. Discourtesy is not a legal offence, and it does not
excuse assault and battery. If a burglar breaks into my house and I knock him down, the law will
acquit me, and if I am physically assaulted, it will permit me to retaliate with reasonable violence. It
does this because the burglar and my assailant have broken quite definite commands of the law. But
no legal system could attempt to legislate against bad manners or could sanction the use of violence
against something which it does not itself recognize as a legally punishable offence. And our
sympathy with the lift man, we must admit that the law is reasonable. It would never do if we were at
liberty to box people‟s ears because we did not like their behaviour, or the tone of their voices, or the
scowl on their faces. Our fists would never be idle, and the gutters of the city would run with blood all
day.
I may be as uncivil as I may please and the law will protect me against violent retaliation. I
may be haughty or boorish and there is penalty to pay except the penalty of being written down an
ill-mannered fellow. The law does not compel me to say “Please or to attune my voice to other
people‟s sensibilities any more than it says that I shall not wax my moustache or dye my hair or wear
ringlets down my back.
Answers
Answer:
1. Write in your own words what you understand by the term the ‘rule of law’. In your response include a fictitious or real example of a violation of the rule of law.
Answer: The rule of law is a provision of the Indian Constitution that states that all people in independent India are equal before the law. Every law is equal for every citizen in the country. Neither the President or any other high official is above the law. The punishment for any crime committed will be the same for every person, irrespective of post or power. For example if a Clerk is punished for corruption, the same punishment needs to be given to a higher Official or Minister for committing the same crime of corruption.
2. State two reasons why historians refute the claim that the British introduced the rule of law in India.
Answer: Two reasons why historians refute to claim that the British introduced the rule of law in India are:
The colonial law was arbitrary
The Indian Nationalists played a prominent role i
n the development of the legal sphere in British India
3. Re-read the storyboard on how a new law on domestic violence got passed. Describe in your own words the different ways in which women’s groups worked to make this happen.
Answer: The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 was passed with an aim to protect women against any kind of violence, be it physical or verbal. Various women’s groups worked to make this happen by reporting multiple cases of domestic violence to the to various forums. A group of lawyers, law students and activists worked together for drafting the Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection Bill). Other than this, various Women organisations, National Commission for Women made submissions to the Parliamentary Standing Committee. All these actions taken by women, together made the Government pass the bill against domestic violence.
4. Write in your own words what you understand by the following sentence on page 44-45: They also began fighting f
or greater equality and wanted to change the idea of law from a set of rules that they were forced to obey, to the law as including ideas of justice.
Answer: India before independence was forced to follow the rules set by the British Government. These set of rules were arbitrary and not were not authorised by the Indian nationalists. Hence the freedom struggle against the Britishers also aimed at making a set of rules that were fair and just for all and were not just imposed on the Indians to follow. The Indian Nationalists began to fight for their rights and wanted a set of rules that were equal for all.
Answer:
1.The rule of law is an Indian Constitutional clause that asserts that all persons in independent India are equal before the law. Every legislation applies equally to all citizens in the country. The President, like any other senior authority, is not above the law. Every person, regardless of position or influence, shall face the same punishment for whatever crime committed. If a Clerk is penalised for corruption, the same sentence must be meted out to a higher official or minister who commits the same offence.
2.Historians disagree with the assertion that the British established the rule of law in India for two reasons: The colonial legislation was capricious. The Indian Nationalists were influential in the creation of British India's legal system.
Explanation:
3.Historians disagree with the assertion that the British established the rule of law in India for two reasons: The colonial legislation was capricious. The Indian Nationalists were influential in the creation of British India's legal system.
4.Prior to independence, India was obligated to observe the regulations established by the British government. These regulations were arbitrary and were not sanctioned by Indian nationalists. As a result, the independence movement against the Britishers also aimed at creating a system of regulations that were fair and reasonable for everybody, rather than merely enforced on the Indians. The Indian Nationalists began to struggle for their rights and want a system of norms that applied to everyone.
#SPJ3