Supreme Court to Review Plea Against Karol Bagh MLA Vishesh Ravi
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to examine the correctness of a Delhi High Court order that dismissed a petition seeking to set aside Aam Aadmi Party legislator Vishesh Ravi's 2020 election victory from the Karol Bagh constituency.
A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan agreed to review the matter following a petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party Member of Parliament Yogender Chandolia, who contested against Ravi in the 2020 Delhi assembly elections.
On April 24, the Delhi High Court had dismissed Chandolia's petition on the grounds that it had become infructuous due to the passage of time and the completion of fresh assembly elections in 2025, which Ravi also won.
During Monday's hearing, the Supreme Court bench noted that fresh elections had already taken place. However, the court agreed to hear the petition after senior advocate Arvind Kumar Gupta, appearing for Chandolia alongside advocate C Parkash, argued that the High Court failed to decide an essential question of law. The counsel argued that a judicial determination is needed on whether submitting a false declaration regarding educational qualifications in an election nomination form amounts to a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act.
Chandolia, who lost the 2020 Karol Bagh assembly race to Ravi by a margin of more than 67,000 votes, alleged in his petition that Ravi provided conflicting information about his education across multiple election cycles. According to the petition, Ravi declared his educational qualification as a Bachelor of Commerce degree in 2013, listed himself as pursuing a B.A. Programme in 2015, and subsequently declared himself to be a Class 10 pass in the 2020 election affidavit.
Chandolia contended that these discrepancies constituted a false declaration that warranted setting aside the 2020 election result.
The Delhi High Court had previously held that Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act pertains to false statements made against another candidate to harm their electoral prospects, rather than a candidate's disclosures about their own qualifications. The High Court also concluded that because Ravi's 2020 term had concluded and fresh elections were held in 2025, the election petition was rendered infructuous.
