Nothis dicision is not against the principle of democratic elections. according to the Indian constitution some criminals and persons with unsound mind can be denied the right to vote criminals should not be allowed to contest elections .the court has taken right dicision is in accordance with the provision of law.

Introduction:
The decision to disallow Chinappa and Satbir from contesting elections due to their criminal convictions raises the question of whether it goes against the principle of democratic elections. In order to assess this, we need to consider the fundamental principles of democratic elections and the reasons behind disqualifying individuals with criminal convictions from participating in the electoral process.

Principle of Democratic Elections:
Democratic elections are based on the principles of fairness, equality, and the will of the people. Every eligible citizen should have the right to participate in the electoral process, either as a candidate or as a voter. However, certain restrictions are imposed to safeguard the integrity of the electoral system and ensure that individuals who are unfit or pose a threat to society are not allowed to contest elections.

Disqualification due to Criminal Convictions:
Disqualifying individuals with criminal convictions from contesting elections is a common practice in many democratic countries. The rationale behind this is to prevent individuals with a history of criminal behavior from holding public office, as it may undermine the democratic values and trust in the system. Furthermore, it helps maintain the ethical standards and integrity of the elected representatives.

Case of Chinappa and Satbir:
1. Chinappa was convicted for torturing his wife for dowry.
2. Satbir was held guilty of practicing untouchability.

Reasoning for Disqualification:
1. Protection of Human Rights: Chinappa's conviction for torturing his wife for dowry indicates a violation of human rights and raises concerns about his moral character. Allowing him to contest elections could potentially compromise the rights and safety of others, undermining the principles of democracy.
2. Upholding Equality: Satbir's conviction for practicing untouchability reflects a clear violation of the principles of equality and social justice. Permitting him to participate in elections could send a message that such discriminatory practices are tolerated, which contradicts the democratic ideals of equal rights for all citizens.

Conclusion:
The decision to disqualify Chinappa and Satbir from contesting elections due to their criminal convictions aligns with the principles of democratic elections. It aims to protect human rights, uphold equality, and preserve the integrity of the electoral process. By preventing individuals with criminal backgrounds from holding public office, the decision helps maintain the trust and credibility of the democratic system.