With the dawn of the 21st century, new challenges have defied the world order. These challenges are important to the survival of global political, social, cultural and economic order. Democracy is not an exception. Generally, democracy is defined as a government of the people by the people and for the people. It may be explained that people elect their representatives for a certain period to rule over them for their welfare and upbringing. A party is elected through this system based on its ideology and manifesto. The manifesto determines the future course of governance and destiny of a country. It may be based on moderate or extremist ideas. Coming four or five years or whatever term the elected government has to rule, the country will be run following the nature of the manifesto of the ruling party. Democracy has many challenges. Recently, it has encountered new challenges of racism and extremism. Both have changed the definition of a word democracy. Leaving definition and explanation of democracy in racism and extremism perspective, the point which needs to be deliberated upon is whether such countries may be called democratic in its true nature. Democracy is run under certain constitutional provisions. These provisions guarantee certain rights to the majority and minority subjects of a state. They save the subjects from exploitation, racial discrimination and religious intolerance. They provide equal opportunities of earning a livelihood and to live by their respective religious doctrines and teachings, etc. Like other democratic countries, India is also considered as such. It is held as the largest democratic country in the world. It is due to a big number of registered voters in the general elections held after every five years. The undemocratic attitude of Bhartia Janta Party (BJP) was witnessed by the world when it got a majority in the state of Gujarat. Narendra Modi was Chief Minister of the State. The Muslims were killed in “religious” riots in the state of Gujrat. The Indian government’s attitude towards its minorities, elected opposition, occupied Kashmir and extremist policies are slaps on its democratic face In 2019, general elections were held in India. BJP came victoriously as the majority party. The voters authorised the party to rule for the second time. The party first got the opportunity to rule India in 2014. The opposition of India has condemned the actions of Modi’s government inside and out of the Indian parliament. The Modi government did not even allow the leader of Congress party, Rahul Gandhi, to tour occupied Kashmir in August 2019 after changing its status by the revocation of articles 35 (A) and 370 of Indian constitution. He and his colleagues were not allowed to go outside the airport and become the first-hand witness of happenings in occupied Kashmir. The constitution of India was effected on January 26, 1950. Its Articles 12 to 35 deal with the fundamental rights. Article 15 provides for prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, caste, sex or place of birth. Article 19 provides for the protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech and expression. Muslims form about 172 million of the total population of India. The third-largest Muslim population is being treated in violation of the aforementioned constitutional provisions. They are even targeted based on doubt that they might have brought the meat of a cow. The Sikhs and Dalits are also victims of the Modi government’s policies. According to a media report, noble prize winner women have also expressed concerns on the human rights condition in India. They have demanded Bill Gates to not confer the award on Indian premier Modi. Such attitude of the Indian government towards its minorities, elected opposition, occupied Kashmir and extremist policies are slaps on the democratic face of the country. India may not be considered and called the largest democracy of the world if it does not fulfil and enforce democracy in its true perspective and spirit. Can a country be called democratic if it has a democratic system being run by the extremists, which violates the constitution of the country? Does it mean the majority of voters have become extremists, who want to convert a democratic country into a country where voters may cast their votes for ideologies and manifestos based on extremism? The writer is an author and has a doctorate in Political Science