M. CHANDRA v. M. THANGAMUTHU & ANR.

Validity of community Certificate & Evidence Act :

58Copy pinpoint58. There is nothing on record to show that the community G certificate was issued illegally or in contravention of the valid procedure. The Election petitioner should have examined the person in charge while the certificate was being issued to bring to light any alleged malpractice in the issuance of the said certificate. The validity of the issuance of the community H

88 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 11 S.C.R.

A certificate is presumed unless shown otherwise by the respondent no.1, who clearly failed to do so. It is also baffling to note that the conversion certificate from the Arya Samaj was not examined in detail by the respondents inspite of the High Court making a strong observation in this regard. No proof by B way of documents or oral evidence was provided to show how the certificate was granted and what procedure was followed. It is also pertinent to mention that no one raised any objection to the appellant filing her nomination for the Assembly elections in 2006 from the reserved constituency. All the issues have c been raised after the appellant won the election from the Rajapalayam constituency. As pointed by the High Court, it is not necessary to read too much into contributions made into religious bodies and institutions as it is open for people outside the particular community also. Hence based purely on the evidence before this court and the observations made by us in 0 this regard, the Election petitioner has not been able to prove conclusively that the appellant professes Christianity. The evidence produced is, contradictory and smacks of political rivalry.

59Copy pinpoint59. In light of these findings, we need not go into the other issues.

60Copy pinpoint60. In the result we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order passed by the High Court. No order as to costs.

D.G. Appeal allowed.