Consider the following statements:

Section 8 of the RP Act, 1951 deals with disqualification of a lawmaker for conviction in certain offences.

In Lily Thomas v Union of India, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Section 8(4) of the RPA as unconstitutional.

Section 8(4)of the RPA, 1951 states the person shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of 6 years since his release.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Question

Article 102deals with the disqualification of MPs from either house of the Parliament.
The Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides for the conduct of election of the Houses of Parliament, the qualifications and disqualifications for membership of those Houses. Section 8 of the RP Act, 1951 deals with disqualification of a lawmaker for conviction in certain offences.
Section 8(1) - specific offences.
Section 8(2) - offences that deal with hoarding or profiteering, adulteration of food or drugs and for conviction and sentence (at least 6 months) under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Section 8(3)of the RPA, 1951 states that a person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 2 years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction. Further the person shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of 6 years since his release.
The disqualification can be reversed if a higher court grants a stay on the conviction or decides the appeal in favour of the convicted lawmaker.
In Lily Thomas v Union of India, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Section 8(4) of the RPA as unconstitutional.
Section 8(4)of the RPA stated that the disqualification takes effect only after 3 months have elapsed from the date of conviction, within which lawmakers could file an appeal in the High Court.

GKToday Admin · Accepted Answer

Only 1 & 2

Article 102deals with the disqualification of MPs from either house of the Parliament.
The Representation of the People Act, 1951 provides for the conduct of election of the Houses of Parliament, the qualifications and disqualifications for membership of those Houses. Section 8 of the RP Act, 1951 deals with disqualification of a lawmaker for conviction in certain offences.
Section 8(1) - specific offences.
Section 8(2) - offences that deal with hoarding or profiteering, adulteration of food or drugs and for conviction and sentence (at least 6 months) under the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Section 8(3)of the RPA, 1951 states that a person convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 2 years shall be disqualified from the date of such conviction. Further the person shall continue to be disqualified for a further period of 6 years since his release.
The disqualification can be reversed if a higher court grants a stay on the conviction or decides the appeal in favour of the convicted lawmaker.
In Lily Thomas v Union of India, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down Section 8(4) of the RPA as unconstitutional.
Section 8(4)of the RPA stated that the disqualification takes effect only after 3 months have elapsed from the date of conviction, within which lawmakers could file an appeal in the High Court.