The Kerala High Court has asked the State to respond to Antony Raju’s plea seeking suspension of his conviction in the decades-old evidence tampering case. Raju says the conviction could block him from contesting upcoming elections unless it is stayed.
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday asked the State government to file its response to a petition filed by former Kerala Minister Antony Raju, who has requested that his conviction in the long-pending underwear evidence tampering case be kept in suspension until his criminal appeal is decided.
Justice CS Dias issued notice to the State and posted the matter for further hearing on March 3. The case has drawn attention because the conviction not only affects Raju’s criminal liability but also has serious political consequences, including his disqualification as a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA).
ALSO READ: Underwear Evidence Tampering Case: Kerala MLA Antony Raju Convicted in 33-Year-Old Case
Raju was convicted on January 3, 2026 by the Nedumangadu Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I in a case that dates back more than 30 years. The trial court found him 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.
Following the conviction, Raju filed an appeal before a sessions court challenging the magistrate court’s verdict. While the sessions court suspended his jail sentence, it refused to suspend his conviction. As a result, Raju continues to remain disqualified from contesting elections under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Because of this, Raju has now approached the High Court seeking suspension of his conviction until his appeal is finally decided. Through this plea, he is also effectively seeking restoration of his MLA status and eligibility to contest the upcoming State Assembly elections.
In his petition, Raju has argued that the sessions court wrongly concluded that no serious harm would be caused if his conviction was not stayed. The plea specifically states:
“The finding of the learned Judge that there are absolutely no irreparable consequences in refusing the stay is contrary to the facts and settled law. The Petitioner is a sitting member of the Legislative Assembly whose term is nearly complete and who intends to contest the upcoming general election, which is now at the doorstep. Barring a candidate from contesting an election based on a conviction that is currently under appeal constitutes an irreversible injury that cannot be compensated in monetary terms,”
Raju is currently the leader of the Janadhipathya Kerala Congress party, which is part of the ruling Left Democratic Front (LDF) coalition in Kerala. His plea highlights that under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, any person convicted and sentenced to not less than two years of imprisonment is immediately disqualified from contesting elections.
He argues that unless the conviction itself is suspended, this disqualification will continue even though his appeal is pending before the sessions court. According to the plea, this affects both his present tenure and his ability to seek re-election in the forthcoming polls.
The petition also contends that the appellate court did not properly apply the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding suspension of conviction. It points out that while such power should be used cautiously, courts have recognised that it can be exercised in cases where failure to do so would cause irreversible injustice.
Raju’s plea further argues that the sessions court did not fully consider the consequences of allowing the conviction to remain in force during the pendency of the appeal. It states that if the conviction continues, the appeal may become meaningless because the disqualification would already have taken effect.
Additionally, the petition challenges the trial court’s appreciation of evidence. It claims that there were inconsistencies in witness testimonies and disputes the findings that evidence was tampered with. According to Raju, the issues raised in his appeal require detailed examination and cannot be brushed aside at this stage.
The case has its roots in an incident from 1990. An Australian national, Andrew Salvatore Cervelli, was arrested at the Thiruvananthapuram airport for allegedly smuggling 61.5 grams of charas hidden inside his underwear. Cervelli was initially convicted by a trial court.
However, on appeal, the Kerala High Court noticed that the underwear produced in court as material evidence was smaller in size than what had been recorded at the time of seizure. Because of this discrepancy, the High Court acquitted Cervelli.
Later, information received from the Australian National Central Bureau suggested that the underwear produced as evidence in the Cervelli case may have been altered while it was in court custody. Based on this information, a criminal case was registered in 1994 against Raju, who was then a practising lawyer and had represented Cervelli, along with a court clerk named KJ Jose. A charge sheet was filed in 2006.
Over the years, the proceedings saw several delays. The case was later revived following directions from the High Court and the Supreme Court. The trial eventually resumed and concluded with Raju’s conviction in January 2026 for tampering with evidence in the Cervelli case.
The Kerala High Court will now examine whether Raju’s conviction should be suspended until the sessions court decides his appeal. The outcome of this plea will have a direct impact not only on his legal status but also on his political future ahead of the upcoming elections.
Case Title:
Antony Raju v. State of Kerala
Click Here to Read More Reports on Antony Raju
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
