Consider the following statements with reference to disqualifications under the Representation of People Act, 1951 (RPA):
1. Under the provisions of the RPA, a person is disqualified from membership of either House of Parliament if he/she holds an Office of Profit.
2. A person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of five years after his/her release.
3. If a Member of Parliament is disqualified under the provisions of the RPA, they have three months to file an appeal against the decision of disqualification.

Which of the statement(s) given above is/are not correct?
(a) 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3

Question

Consider the following statements with reference to disqualifications under the Representation of People Act, 1951 (RPA):
1. Under the provisions of the RPA, a person is disqualified from membership of either House of Parliament if he/she holds an Office of Profit.
2. A person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction and shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of five years after his/her release.
3. If a Member of Parliament is disqualified under the provisions of the RPA, they have three months to file an appeal against the decision of disqualification.

Which of the statement(s) given above is/are not correct?
(a) 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2, and 3

TutorArc · Accepted Answer

Statement 1 is incorrect: The disqualification for holding an Office of Profit is a constitutional provision under Article 102 of the Constitution of India, not the Representation of People Act (RPA), 1951. The RPA provides for disqualification based on specific criteria, but the office of profit disqualification is rooted in the Constitution, which states that a Member of Parliament (MP) or a Member of a State Legislative Assembly (MLA) will be disqualified if they hold an office of profit under the government, except those exempted by law.

Statement 2 is incorrect: Under Section 8(3) of the Representation of People Act, 1951, a person convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment for two or more years is disqualified from the date of conviction and continues to be disqualified for six years after their release, not five years. This provision is applicable to cases like that of Rahul Gandhi, who was disqualified recently under this rule.

Statement 3 is incorrect: Section 8(4) of the RPA, 1951 previously allowed MPs or MLAs who were disqualified under Section 8 to appeal within three months from the date of conviction. However, in the Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2013) case, the Supreme Court declared this provision unconstitutional, stating that disqualification is immediate upon conviction, and no grace period is allowed. Therefore, the three-month appeal period no longer exists.

Website Link

All Grade Details

More..

Demo Session!

Demo Session Fill out the form below and hit the Join Session button to proceed.

Are you genious?

Demo Session
Fill out the form below and hit the Join Session button to proceed.