Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Justice Augustine George Masih, Supreme Court
A Duly Issued Caste Certificate Amenable To Challenge Only Under Concerned Statute, Not Election Petition: Supreme Court
|The Supreme Court allowed CPI(M) leader A. Raja’s Appeal and set aside the 2023 Judgment of the Kerala High Court that had invalidated his election from the Devikulam Assembly constituency.
The Supreme Court has held that a duly issued Caste or Community Certificate is amenable to challenge only under the provisions of the statute concerned, and not in an Election Petition.
The Court clarified thus while allowing CPI(M) leader A. Raja’s Appeal and setting aside the 2023 Judgment of the Kerala High Court that had invalidated his election from the Devikulam Assembly constituency.
The three-Judge Bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Justice Augustine George Masih held, “We deem it appropriate to clarify the position in the wake of the present Judgment. A duly issued Caste/Community Certificate would be amenable to challenge only under the provisions of the statute concerned, and not in an Election Petition. In case no statute governing the field in a State/Union Territory is operative, the Madhuri Patil (supra) guidelines, as modified in Dayaram (supra), shall be followed.”
The Bench refrained from passing any Order apportioning costs as the Appeal was finally decided.
Senior Advocates V. Giri, T. Krishnanunni, and N. Raghuraj represented the Appellant while Senior Advocate Narender Hooda represented the Respondent.
Case Background
The Appellant preferred an Appeal under Section 116-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act) against the Judgment of the Kerala High Court in an Election Petition, declaring the election of the Appellant to the Legislative Assembly from Devikulam Legislative Assembly Constituency 088 in Idukki District, Kerala, which is reserved for the Scheduled Castes (SCs) as void. General Elections to the said constituency were to be conducted in 2021 and the Appellant filed his nomination papers before the Returning Officer, declaring that he belongs to the ‘Hindu Parayan’ caste as per Caste Certificate issued by the Tehsildar. The said caste has been declared as a Scheduled Caste in relation to the State of Kerala in Part VIII of the Schedule to the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, issued by the President of India.
Oral objections before the Returning Officer were raised by the Respondent i.e., Congress candidate D. Kumar, contending that the Appellant was not a member of the Scheduled Castes from Kerala and instead, he was a Christian. The Returning Officer rejected the said objections and accepted the nomination papers. On election result, the Appellant secured 59,049 votes and was declared elected by a margin of 7848 votes over the Respondent defeated candidate who had secured 51,201 votes. The Appellant’s election was challenged by the Respondent before the High Court. As his election was declared as void, the Appellant was before the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court in the above regard, observed, “From the evidence available, it is not possible to hold that the Appellant ‘professes’ Christianity. In the factual setting of the present lis, the evidence adduced from the side of the Appellant would reveal that the Caste Certificate(s) issued in his favour by the Competent Authority till date hold the field.”
The Court said that an Election Petitioner is obligated to plead and prove his case beyond reasonable doubt.
“In the case at hand, the Competent Authority who issued the Caste Certificate was not examined – this should have been sought for by the Respondent, moreso per M. Chandra (supra). Although even that would not take the Respondent’s case too far, adjudged on the anvil of the afore-scrutiny undertaken by us. Admittedly, no prayer was made in the Election Petition to set aside the Caste Certificate(s) of the Appellant”, it added.
The Court was of the view that the Respondent’s Election Petition falls short of the standards prescribed and that the Appellant retained the Hindu Parayan caste, as a member of the Hindu religion, when he contested from the Devikulam Legislative Assembly Constituency.
“The Appellant is entitled to all consequential benefits as a Member of the Legislative Assembly for the entire period from the date of oath”, it ordered.
Accordingly, the Apex Court allowed the Appeal, set aside the High Court’s Judgment, and dismissed the Election Petition.
Cause Title- A. Raja v. D. Kumar (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 629)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Advocates V. Giri, T. Krishnanunni, N Raghuraj, AOR G. Prakash, Advocates Joice George, Beena Prakash, Jishnu M L, Priyanka Prakash, Anoop R, Rahul Narang, Nihar Dharmadhikari, Rao Vishwaja, and Harshed Sundar.
Respondent: Senior Advocate Narender Hooda, AOR Aljo K. Joseph, Advocates Shiv Bhatnagar, Yuvraj Nandal, Tannu, Sheikh Mohsin, Vinay Kumar Puvvala, N. Leela Vara Prasad, Sarabjeet Singh, and Shelna K.