It differs from place to place but the democratic set up is there otherwise being Hindu majority it would not have succeeded in India. 

@M.G.Singh

More and more I read your posts on this subject, I really feel how important it is to have the attributes of scholastic rigor, impartial and unbiased analysis and logical evaluation of it. I personally like to be free from dogma and obstinacy produced from self-opinionatedness. I shall come back with a rejoinder to your post directed at me  later. May be a little more digression!

During the days of Ramayan the RamRajya is considered the best form of democracy where people's voice is supreme. So there is deeper link between Hinudism and democracy. 

Rama Rajya was a good governance but certainly not a democratic form of government.

How does anyone really know what Ram rajya was. It is a elastic concept and was autocratic with the king the supreme power. Even in Ram rajya the ills of Hindu society like varna system were not eradicated

MG Singh wrote:

How does anyone really know what Ram rajya was. It is a elastic concept and was autocratic with the king the supreme power. Even in Ram rajya the ills of Hindu society like varna system were not eradicated

Rama was king of ayodhya so far as the Ramayana epic goes. He was a Hindu king and supposed to rule on advice of Raj Purohit and Samant who belonged to Brahmin caste. Varna system is part of Hindu system and as king, Rama was to safeguard and not dismantle.the tyrannical varna system and other features of Hindu system.  

All the food democracies suffice on the concept of strong central leadership which many sees at autocratic in nature, otherwise with a weak leadership democracy would be falling like ten pins, we have experienced this aspect before, that is why Ram Rajya is a good form of democracy where, when people does not accept Sita then Ram sent her into exile looking at the wishes and whims of people.

mohan manohar wrote:

All the food democracies suffice on the concept of strong central leadership which many sees at autocratic in nature, otherwise with a weak leadership democracy would be falling like ten pins, we have experienced this aspect before, that is why Ram Rajya is a good form of democracy where, when people does not accept Sita then Ram sent her into exile looking at the wishes and whims of people.

 

And the same Rama executed a Dalit because he dared to study holy scriptures.

That was the norm of that times, so he did it, these are not the norms of present times so that is not happening.

If it was the norm, how you can say Ramarajya is an example of Democracy according to present norms of Democracy?