President's rule can be imposed in a State if the government is not being run according to the provisions of the Constitution. State whether any of the following conditions are a fit case for imposition of President's rule in the State. Give reasons.
Condition 1: Two members of opposition killed by criminals This is NOT a fit case for imposing President's rule. The killing of MLAs by criminals is a law and order problem, not a constitutional breakdown. The opposition demanding dismissal does not automatically justify President's rule. The State government can still function according to constitutional provisions.
Condition 2: Rising crimes against children and women This is NOT a fit case for President's rule. Increasing crime rates indicate administrative challenges but do not mean that the government cannot be carried on according to the Constitution. This is a governance issue that the State should handle.
Condition 3: No majority, fear of horse-trading This is NOT automatically a fit case. A hung assembly does not justify President's rule. The context shows that dismissing governments "without testing their majority" was controversial. The Governor must first allow parties to form a stable government before recommending President's rule.
Condition 4: Different parties at Centre and State as opponents This is NOT a fit case. The context states that when different parties rule at Centre and State, the role of Governor becomes "even more controversial." The Sarkaria Commission recommended non-partisan appointments. Political rivalry alone cannot justify President's rule.
Condition 5: More than 2000 killed in communal riots This CAN be a fit case for President's rule. Large-scale communal violence with massive casualties indicates that the State government has failed to maintain constitutional order and protect citizens. This suggests that the government cannot be carried on according to constitutional provisions, justifying intervention under Article 356.
Explanation
The question tests understanding of when President's rule under Article 356 can be imposed. The key constitutional provision states that President's rule applies when 'a situation has arisen in which the Government of the State cannot be carried on in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.' Students must distinguish between law and order issues (not fit cases) and actual breakdown of constitutional machinery (fit case). The context also highlights that President's rule has been misused historically - dismissing majority governments (Kerala 1959) or without testing majority, making the Supreme Court's role in examining constitutional validity important. The Sarkaria Commission's recommendations on non-partisan Governor appointments is relevant to Condition 4.
Solution Steps
Step 1: Understand Article 356 - President's rule applies when State government cannot function according to Constitution.
Step 2: Analyze each condition against this constitutional threshold.
Step 3: Distinguish between law and order issues (Conditions 1, 2) and constitutional breakdown.
Step 4: Apply historical context - misuse of President's rule (Kerala 1959, post-1967 dismissals) and Sarkaria Commission recommendations.
Step 5: Conclude that only Condition 5 (massive communal violence) potentially meets the threshold for President's rule.