Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Principle: Anyone who induces or attempts to induce a voter to vote in a particular manner on the ground that the voter will face divine displeasure, shall be guilty of the offence of interfering with the free exercise of the right to vote.
Facts: During the election campaign period one candidate X told the voters that if they do not vote for her, voters will be cursed because the election candidate is God‘s own child and those who do not vote for her, will not be liked by God.
Options
X has committed an offence
X has not committed an offence because she only narrated what she felt
X has not committed an offence because she has freedom of speech and expression
X has not committed an offence because she did not compel anyone to vote for her
Advertisements
Solution
X has committed an offense
Explanation:
X has committed an offense because the principle is clear that anyone who induces or attempts to induce a voter to vote in a particular manner on the ground that the voter will face divine displeasure commits the offense of interfering with the free exercise of the right to vote.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
One of the reasons for recusal of a Judge is that litigants/the public might entertain a reasonable apprehension about his impartiality. As Lord Chief Justice Hewart said: "It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." And therefore, in order to uphold the credibility of the integrity institution, Judge recuses from hearing the case. A Judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, while assuming Office, takes an oath as prescribed under Schedule III to the Constitution of India, that: "… I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws." Called upon to discharge the duties of the Office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will, it is only desirable, if not proper, that a Judge, for any unavoidable reason like some pecuniary interest, affinity or adversity with the parties in the case, direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the litigation, family directly involved in litigation on the same issue elsewhere, the Judge being aware that he or someone in his immediate family has an interest, financial or otherwise that could have a substantial bearing as a consequence of the decision in the litigation, etc., to recuse himself from the adjudication of a particular matter. No doubt, these examples are not exhaustive. The simple question is, whether the adjudication by the Judge concerned, would cause reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonably informed litigant and fair-minded public as to his impartiality. Being an institution whose hallmark is transparency, it is only proper that the Judge discharging high and noble duties, at least broadly indicate the reasons for recusing from the case so that the litigants or the well-meaning public may not entertain any misunderstanding. Once reasons for recusal are indicated, there will not be any room for attributing any motive for the recusal. To put it differently, it is part of his duty to be accountable to the Constitution by upholding it without fear or favour, affection or ill- will. Therefore, I am of the view that it is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one's oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a Judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case.
As per the passage if right-minded persons entertain a feeling that there is any likelihood of bias on the part of the Judge, he must recuse. Does the passage also mentions about the recourse to be taken if there is mere possibility of such a feeling is
Mark the best option:
Who appoints the Chairman of State Public Service Commission?
Which Article is for "Protection of interests of Minorities"?
Which of the following amendments, amended the preamble to the constitution of India 1950?
In 1950, the Constitution of India contains how many classifications of States of Indian Union?
Among the following states, which one was formed as a state of Indian Union at last?
If any new territory becomes a part of India the Government of India specifies the persons of the territory who shall be
Which of the following has the power to decide on the question as to disqualifications of members of the Parliament?
The National Commission of Scheduled Tribes has been established under the
On April 2013, the Supreme Court held that the modification of a well-known cancer-fighting drug is not a patentable new invention against which pharmaceutical firm?
