The Kerala High Court refused to suspend the conviction of Antony Raju in an evidence-tampering case, upholding the sessions court decision, leaving him disqualified from contesting upcoming Assembly elections unless relief is granted by the Supreme Court.
KERALA: The Kerala High Court declined to suspend the recent conviction of former state minister Antony Raju in the underwear evidence‑tampering matter.
A Division Bench led by Justice C. Jayachandran rejected Raju’s challenge to the sessions court’s refusal to stay his conviction. As a result, Raju will remain disqualified from contesting the forthcoming Assembly elections unless the Supreme Court intervenes.
Raju heads the Janadhipathya Kerala Congress, which is aligned with the Left Democratic Front (LDF) in Kerala.
ALSO READ: Underwear Evidence Tampering Case: Kerala MLA Antony Raju Convicted in 33-Year-Old Case
On January 3, the Nedumangadu Judicial First Class Magistrate Court‑I convicted Raju in a case whose origins go back more than 30 years. His appeal is pending before a sessions court, which stayed his sentence but refused to suspend the conviction a decision the High Court has now upheld.
The matter traces to a 1990 prosecution of Australian national Andrew Salvatore Cervelli, who was arrested at Thiruvananthapuram airport for allegedly smuggling 61.5 grams of charas concealed in his underwear. Cervelli was initially convicted, but the Kerala High Court later noted the underwear produced at trial was smaller than the size recorded at seizure and acquitted him.
Subsequently, information from the Australian National Central Bureau suggested the underwear shown as evidence may have been tampered with while in court custody. A criminal complaint was registered in 1994 against Raju, then a practising advocate who had represented Cervelli; a court clerk, KJ Jose, was also implicated and a chargesheet was filed in 2006. Proceedings were revived after directions from the High Court and the Supreme Court, and the trial resumed.
In January, the trial court found Raju guilty under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence), 193 (fabricating false evidence), 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, sentencing him to three years’ imprisonment.
Before the High Court, Raju argued the sessions court erred in finding no irreparable harm would follow from not staying his conviction. He said denial of a stay could damage his political prospects and urged that, while suspension of conviction is exceptional, courts have granted it where refusing would cause irreversible injustice. He also challenged aspects of the trial court’s evidence assessment, pointing to alleged inconsistencies in witness testimony.
The prosecution strongly opposed the petition, warning that suspending Raju’s conviction would create a dangerous precedent that might embolden lawmakers who commit offences. The State further submitted that, following Supreme Court precedent, suspension of conviction is reserved for exceptional cases and that a mere desire to contest elections does not constitute an exceptional circumstance.
Case Title: Antony Raju v. State of Kerala
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
