Observing rituals of faith does not mean person professes that religion: Supreme Court in A Raja election case

Merely observing or practicing rituals of a religion does not amount to professing that faith, the Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday while upholding the election of Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] MLA A Raja from Kerala's Devikulam constituency [A Raja vs D Kumar]..Raja's election was challenged on the ground that he had converted to Christianity and hence could not contest from the Devikulam seat, which is reserved for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe community. The Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Augustine George Masih held,"It is relevant to observe that mere observance/performance of a ritual of/associated with any religion does not ipso facto and necessarily mean that the person ‘professes’ that religion.".The Court pertinently held that a caste/community certificate cannot be assailed in an election petition..The top court today set aside the the Kerala High Court decision to quash the election of Raja from the Devikulam constituency in the 2021 State assembly election as void under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.The High Court had held in March 2023 that Devikulam was a seat reserved for the SC community and since Raja was professing Christianity at the time of his nomination, he could not have contested from that seat. Further, Raja could not have raised a claim of belonging to the Hindu religion after conversion to Christianity, the High Court underscored..While setting aside the High Court verdict, the top court underscored that it is not easy to hide one’s religion or caste in today's digital age."The production of some photographs or some rituals which may have been performed by the Appellant, nay, even assuming they were actually performed by the Appellant, at the cost of repetition, can, in no manner, take the place of evidence, especially when matters of the like herein are being considered by the Courts. In this regard, the High Court seems to have erred by shifting the burden of proof on the Appellant to prove in the negative the allegations.".Senior Advocate V Giri appeared for Raja.Senior Advocate Narender Hooda appeared for D Kumar, who challenged Raja's election..[Read Judgment]