The Kerala High Court on Friday took a dim view of the communal remarks made by BJP candidate B Gopalakrishnan who is contesting the upcoming State assembly elections from Guruvayur constituency in Kerala.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) and also flagged the harm such communal remarks can cause.

"Video (containing communal remarks) has been removed but what about the harm caused to the community, to the society and to the country?" the judge demanded.

The Court was hearing a plea filed by Kerala Students' Union (KSU) leader Gokul alleging that Gopalakrishnan violated the provisions of the RP Act by making communal remarks.

Justice Thomas eventually disposed of the plea after noting that since the petitioner's representation is pending consideration before the Chief Election Officer, the petitioner must first pursue remedy before the Election Commission of India (ECI).

The Court also directed that the ECI should decide the representation within two months.

"Since representation has admittedly been received by the first respondent (Election Commission of India) and is pending consideration, I am of the view that the petition can be disposed of with a direction, without entering into merits, especially since any person aggrieved by any alleged practice contrary to law has remedy under the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Direction to the first respondent to pass appropriate orders on representation, at any rate within 2 months," the Court said.

The Court refrained from making any observations since the same could have a bearing on the polls.

"Considering that the election process has already commenced, it is not appropriate for this Court to make any observations which may have a bearing on the proposed election," the Court stated in its order.

Gopalakrishnan, who is also the State Vice President of BJP, stirred controversy when he said that no Hindu MLA has been elected from Guruvayoor in the last 50 years though the constituency has 48 percent Hindu population.

Guruvayoor houses the famous Sri Krishna temple.

"A Hindu MLA — neither the Left nor the Right has fielded one. Guruvayur is an international pilgrimage centre — yet why isn’t there a Hindu MLA?," he said in a video shared by him on various platforms.

A case has already been registered against Gopalakrishnan by the Police for offences under Section 192 (giving provocation with intent to cause riot) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and 125 of RP Act (Promoting enmity between classes in connection with election).

The controversial video was later taken down as per ToI.

The plea before the High Court alleged that Gopalakrishnan violated the provisions of the RP Act by making communal remarks during his election campaign.

It was submitted that a criminal case had already been registered by the Guruvayoor Temple Police.

Despite the registration of FIR, the Returning Officer had received an accepted Gopalakrishnan's nomination papers.

The petitioner therefore submitted that in view of the communal statements made by the candidate, he is liable to be disqualified from contesting the election.

When the petition against Gopalakrishnan came up for hearing today before the High Court, the judge asked the ECI what it proposes to do.

"What do you do when such instances occur?" the judge asked.

"The returning officer has already filed a complaint and FIR has been registered. The video has also been removed from the social media," the counsel for ECI said.

"Video has been removed but what about the harm caused to the community, to the society and to the country," the judge demanded.

"We are taking actions. On the representation made by the petitioner, reports have already been called for," the counsel replied.

"What is this Model Code of Conduct (MCC)? What is the legal effect of this? You are bringing the entire administration of the State to a halt," the court told ECI.

"Once the election is announced, the MCC comes into force," the counsel said.

"We often hear that the authorities can’t do anything, even judgments of this court are not being followed saying there’s no power under the MCC," the judge remarked.

"The Election Commission has got power my Lord. The object is to provide a level playing field so the party in power doesn’t take undue advantage," the ECI counsel replied.

"What happens when someone makes communal comments or hate comments?" the Court demanded.

"If it’s a penal action the relevant statute will come. But during election time the election commission would pass orders. We have the complaints and we are taking actions under the model code," the Commission replied.

The Court eventually disposed of the plea after directing the Chief Election Officer to decide the representation filed before it by the petitioner.

The plea was filed through advocates Babin T Anthikkad, Vanesha Viswambaran and Rachel Thomas.