Upon Lord Rama's return to Ayodhya after fourteen years of exile alongside Sita and Lakshmana, their homecoming following the lengthy banishment and triumph over Ravana was met with great celebration. The citizens illuminated the city of Ayodhya to welcome them. The populace became aware of Sita's abduction by Ravana and her subsequent rescue from captivity. In the aftermath, whispers and rumours circulated throughout Ayodhya concerning Sita's purity during her time in Ravana's hold.

The Valmiki Ramayana recounts the Agni Pariksha, or trial by fire, that Sita underwent, which has been subject to various interpretations. Some interpretations suggest that Sita willingly chose to undergo the pariksha to demonstrate her purity and loyalty to Rama. Conversely, other interpretations assert that it was Rama who instructed Sita to endure the Agni Pariksha, not out of doubt regarding her purity, but rather to publicly affirm her integrity.

A king is not held accountable to the public for his actions. A monarch possesses the authority to silence the voices of citizens, even by force. The public is expected to comply with the king's commands without question. Those who challenge the king are deemed as threats.

Shri Ram, as a king, had the power to quell the murmurs and rumours of the populace. He was capable of silencing such whispers and was fully aware that the public's rumours lacked foundation; he never questioned Sita's loyalty. Nevertheless, he opted to validate the purity of his wife, Sita, as he believed it was the ruler's responsibility to address the public's inquiries and dispel their doubts. This commitment to duty is why he is revered as the Maryada Purushottam.

Sita firmly believed that she remained pure and loyal to Rama. Consequently, she wholeheartedly embraced the challenge of Agni Pariksha.

Currently, the Election Commission of India finds itself in a position where it must demonstrate its integrity through Agni Pariksha. The opposition leader has raised questions regarding the loyalty of the Election Commission. Will the Election Commission substantiate its allegiance to the office with concrete evidence?

India is not governed by a king or a monarch; it is governed by the people, for the people, and of the people. The supremacy always lies with the people, and every governmental institution is accountable to the public.

The Election Commission of India is an autonomous constitutional entity tasked with overseeing all elections in the country. It is responsible for ensuring free and fair elections throughout India. Any manipulation of elections constitutes an assault on democracy.

The role of the opposition leader is to scrutinise the government regarding its policies and actions, holding it accountable to the public. The voice of the opposition is not merely that of an individual; it represents the voice of the public. When the government responds to inquiries from the opposition or the media, the fourth pillar of democracy, it is effectively responding to the public.

Rahul Gandhi, the opposition leader in the House of the People, has made serious allegations against the Election Commission and the government, claiming that the elections were manipulated. He asserts that free and fair elections were not conducted, and that the BJP ascended to power through the votes of fraudulent voters. This is a grave accusation that raises concerns among advocates of free and fair elections about whether our electoral system and democracy itself are under threat. As a constitutional body, the Election Commission must demonstrate that it has not facilitated unfair elections and that it remains loyal to the Constitution.

Rahul Gandhi is not an ordinary individual; he is an elected representative of the people, a member of parliament, and, notably, the leader of the opposition.

The chief election commissioner, along with other election commissioners, is expected to be appointed by the President based on the recommendations of a selection committee. This committee should comprise the Prime Minister, the leader of the opposition, the Chief Justice of India and a union cabinet minister. But now the selection committee has become the dominion of the Prime Minister.

The leader of the opposition should also have a significant role in the selection of the Election Commissioner. In the present situation, the opposition is sceptical about the credibility of the Election Commission, and it is asked to prove its loyalty to the Constitution.

The government possesses all the necessary agencies and state mechanisms. It should demonstrate to the public that Rahul Gandhi is mistaken and that no electoral fraud has occurred. If the election commission operates with integrity, it should provide him with the digital data he requests. Why does the government seek to suppress his inquiries?

The election commission bears a moral obligation to the public to demonstrate that it operates with integrity and has conducted elections that are both free and fair.

The accused government must establish that the claims of vote theft are merely a concocted narrative by the opposition, driven by a political agenda. The public is pointing fingers at you. It is time to affirm your allegiance to the Constitution.

The adage "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion" is relevant in this context, indicating that both the government and the election commission should avoid any semblance of misconduct. When constitutional bodies maintain an impeccable reputation, it enhances the essence of democracy.

Let all constitutional bodies in India embody the virtues of Shri Rama as we strive to establish a Ram Rajya in our nation. He addressed the concerns of his citizens and answered their questions with courage, having nothing to conceal and being assured of Sita's purity.

The inquiries and documentary evidence presented by the opposition leader pose a challenge to both the Election Commission and the government. Will you uphold the Constitution and reinforce the principles of democracy?