When the objective is noble, the means do not matter. Do you agree? Justify your stand with a suitable example. (150 words – 10 marks)

No, I do not completely agree with the statement. Even if the objective is noble,
the means through which it is to be achieved must not be compromised. For, if
they are compromised, the objective itself may lose relevance. A case in point is
the program of forced sterilizations that India witnessed in the 1970s. The
objective was noble, to control our rapidly burgeoning population. But such harsh
and draconian means would have violated the basic rights granted to us by the
Constitution, rendering the objective moot.
However, there may be circumstances where the situation is very compelling.
Here, usual norms can be overlooked as a matter of exception. But even so, the
means should not be contrary to public welfare. E.g. during disasters, the usual
rules can be relaxed, because this is being done for larger public good. But even
here, public welfare must not be jeopardized.