Every country, state, district, institution, and every fragment that involves a group of people aiming to accomplish a task in a protective, less chaotic way chooses a template with rules and regulations to make the task easy and smooth. The rules and regulations are stated, and those who engage with these fragments are informed and proceed to be part of the group. It is the duty of the individual to abide by these rules and regulations. If not, there are several actions that will be taken as consequences. This is how I view laws or rules.

And my curiosity is, why were these laws introduced? The concept of law and order has existed since ancient civilizations, with early legal codes like Hammurabi’s Code (Babylon, around 1754 BCE) aimed at ensuring justice and maintaining peace. Now, law and order have evolved rapidly post-17th century, and in the name of creating a peaceful world, it has sometimes resulted in unintended consequences, which they are now trying to fix. This is a different topic that I will cover later on.

Now, what will happen if the rules are not followed? The foundation of all these rules and regulations is built on fear. Even when I look at the holy books of religions, I see a set of rules and regulations where the core point is: if these are not followed, the consequence will be punishment. Hell is for the bad, and heaven is for the good. With the fear of being punished and sent to hell, people follow good practices, and consequently, there exists some peace compared to non-law periods. But whether society has truly found peace is another topic we won’t get into now.

What happens if someone acknowledges the rules but not entirely, perhaps only 99%, while that 1% doesn’t align with their personal views? Should they abide by that 1% they dislike, or should they ignore it? As a whole, the law should be followed, but each person has their own sense of consciousness, which sometimes takes precedence over any law. But will this impact society or the group they have chosen to work with? No, everyone has their own opinion and perspective.

One such case involves an IPS officer who, while pursuing an M.L., received 59.91% and filed a case in the Madras High Court to round off the mark to 60%. The University of Madras denied this request. What went wrong? Why did the university say no, and why did the officer file a case in the first place? The results are grouped into First Class, Second Class, and Fail. Based on the marks, the class is assigned. But how can we say that 59.91% is not First Class? Some people blindly follow the rules and argue that if the mark is less than 60%, regardless of the decimal, it’s Second Class. They might say that if the student wants 60%, they can rewrite the exam to get more than 60%. On the other hand, some argue that it’s the range that matters, and 0.09% won’t significantly impact eligibility in the class-based system. Competitive exams are where precise numbers matter, and so on. Some argue that it is the university’s ego that led them to say no to the High Court’s judgment. If society is built on rules and the university is a part of this system, it should have abided by the judgment and rounded off the value to 60%. If it didn’t, according to the classic concept of law, it should be penalized for failing to comply.

No one can definitively say what is right or wrong. Every individual has their own set of right and wrong. Even the nations we live in are built on rules that not every individual has agreed upon. There are always ups and downs. But the intention of law is to calm chaos and bring about peace. To achieve this, the fundamental idea is to follow the rules. If an individual, institution, or any fragment doesn’t like the rules and chooses a chaotic path, it is illogical. The common assumption is that such acts are often associated with left-wing ideologies. But it’s not just them—it exists within every individual. We often rebel based on the sense of rightness we believe in, and others will be stubborn in their point as well. It’s human nature to rebel, but this tendency has only been labeled as a left-wing trait. Even this point will be contradicted by many, which is exactly what I’m getting at—everyone rebels.

What feels right is dharma.