Offences under Kerala Police Act not substantive; failure to disclose conviction not ground to void election: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the offences under the Kerala Police Act are not substantive offences and thus the election of a person cannot be voided merely because s/he failed to disclose conviction under that law [Ravi Namboothiri vs KA Baiju]..A division bench of Justices S Abdul Nazeer and V Ramasubramanian said unlike the offences under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) or other special enactments, a person does not become a criminal if convicted under the enactments like Kerala Police Act as these are not substantive offences.Rather, such laws are meant to better regulate the Police force, the Court underscored."Just as strike is a weapon in the hands of the workmen and lockout is a weapon in the hands of the employer under Labour Welfare legislations, protest is a tool in the hands of the civil society and police action is a tool in the hands of the Establishment. All State enactments such as Kerala Police Act, Madras Police Act etc., are aimed at better regulation of the police force and they do not create substantive offences," the judges observed.This is why these Acts themselves empower the police to issue necessary directions for the maintenance of law and order and the violation of any of those directions is made a punishable offence under these Acts, the bench added..In its order, the bench noted that the Kerala Police Act, 1960 repealed the Travancore Cochin Police Act, 1951 and also the Madras District Police Act, 1859 - British era laws."Thus, Kerala Police Act is actually the successor legislation of certain police enactments of the colonial era, whose object was to scuttle the democratic aspirations of the indigenous population. This aspect should be kept in mind before applying blindfold, the principle what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander," the bench opined..The Court was hearing an appeal filed by one Ravi Namboothiri challenging an order of the Kerala High Court passed on October 30, 2018, by which the election of the appellant to his village panchayat was declared void on the ground that he resorted to corrupt practice by not disclosing his conviction under the Kerala Police Act in an incident that happened in 2010.The appellant was accused of barging into the compound of the panchayat office in his village Annamanada in Thrissur district and installing a pandal and staging a dharna. The police had arrested him and over 20 of his supporters for disobeying the directions of the police and forming an unlawful assembly. He was initially convicted even under provisions of the IPC but at the appeal stage before a sessions court, only the conviction under Kerala Police Act was maintained.The argument of the State was that the appellant had violated Section 102(1)(ca) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act which lays down that election of a candidate can be declared void, if the details furnished by the elected candidate are found to be fake. The question which the Court considered was whether the non-disclosure of the conviction for offences under the Kerala Police Act would also come within the purview of Section 102(1)(ca) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. .In its 40-page order, the bench noted that though the appellant's case falls aptly under Section 102(1)(ca) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, which provides for disqualification of an elected candidate for disclosing fake information. "The reason for this is that a person having criminal antecedents, poses himself to be one without any such antecedent, when he fails to make a true disclosure. In law, he passes off or comes out as a person without any criminal antecedent. Therefore, the failure to make a true disclosure in the nomination form regarding the past conviction, will certainly come within the meaning of the word ‘fake’, mentioned in section 102 of the Act," the bench opined.The judges, however, maintained that since the offences under the Kerala Police Act are not substantive the appellant cannot be disqualified for not disclosing his conviction.The Court after taking into account the object of the Kerala Police Act ruled that Section 102(1)(ca) cannot be stretched to such an extent that the failure to disclose conviction for an offence under the Kerala Police Act for holding a dharna in front of a panchayat office, can be taken as a ground for declaring an election void..Advocate Raghenth Basant appeared for Appellant.Senior Advocate PV Surendranath represented the Respondent..[Read Judgment]