Statement–Courses of Action (democratic process & turnout): In the recent Assembly elections, overall voter turnout was less than 40%; which course(s) of action logically follow—(I) the Election Commission should cancel the entire election as the votes cast are insufficient to represent the people, or (II) the Election Commission should strip voting rights from all who did not vote?

Given data

• Turnout in a validly conducted election is under 40%.
• Course I: cancel the entire election on representational grounds.
• Course II: take away the voting rights of non-voters.

Concept/Approach (legality, proportionality, and scope)
Actions must follow from the statement alone and be consistent with democratic principles; punitive or extra-legal steps are not justified without legal basis in the prompt.

Step 1: Course I
Low turnout by itself does not invalidate a lawfully run election; cancellation is neither mandated nor logically compelled by the statement.

Step 2: Course II
Depriving citizens of voting rights because they abstained is punitive and undemocratic; no such authority is indicated.

Verification/Alternative
A reasonable response (not among options) would be voter-education or convenience reforms, not cancellation or disenfranchisement.

Common pitfalls
Confusing a participation problem with an electoral invalidity or endorsing disproportionate punishment.

Final Answer
Neither I nor II follows.