.png)
After the 2025 Assembly elections, the Delhi High Court ruled that Chandolia's election challenge regarding Ravi's purportedly fraudulent declaration of educational qualifications had become moot.
Supreme Court, BJP, and AAP
In response to Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Yogender Chandolia's appeal contesting Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLA Vishesh Ravi's election from Delhi's Karol Bagh due to an alleged fake declaration of educational qualifications, the Supreme Court requested comments on Monday.
A Delhi High Court ruling that rejected Chandolia's appeal to Ravi's 2020 election victory was being heard by a bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan.
After new elections were elected in 2025, the High Court ruled in April 2026 that the lawsuit could not proceed.
Ravi's election was contested by Justices BV Nagarathna and R Mahadevan Chandolia, who ran as BJP candidates in the 2020 Karol Bagh election. They claimed that Ravi had provided misleading information about his educational background in his affidavit and Form 26.
With 67,433 votes, Ravi won the 2020 election; Chandolia came in second with 35,686 votes. Even when Ravi was re-elected from Karol Bagh in the 2025 Delhi Assembly elections, the conflict persisted.
A Delhi High Court Division Bench ruled on April 24, 2026, that Chandolia's plea could not constitute a corrupt practice under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act. While Chandolia's accusation focused on Ravi's own educational background, the High Court ruled that the clause encompasses false claims made about another candidate to harm their chances of winning.
Additionally, the High Court ruled that a statement made in a nomination affidavit does not qualify as "publication" under the clause on its own. The court determined that Chandolia's election petition was no longer valid because Ravi's 2020 term had finished and he had been re-elected in 2025.
In today's Supreme Court argument, Chandolia's attorney pointed out that in his 2013 nomination papers, Ravi claimed to be a B.Com. graduate, but in 2015, he claimed to be pursuing graduation. He argued that the case created a legal question concerning whether it is illegal to lie in an electoral affidavit about one's educational background.
Like the High Court, the Apex Court noted that further elections had been held.There have been new elections. The Court observed that Respondent No. 1 (Ravi) had been successful.
Additionally, the attorney brought up an ongoing Supreme Court petition related to the electoral controversy involving former Delhi minister Jitender Singh Tomar. Tomar was also accused of lying in his electoral affidavit regarding his educational background.
Despite the past statements about his schooling, it was argued that Ravi had stated in the 2020 nomination papers that he was only a Class 10 pass. He contended that although Ravi had stated in 2015 that he was working toward graduation from IGNOU, he had declared himself to be a Class 10 pass.
In response to this submission, Justice Nagarathna noted that "IGNOU degrees were not recognized for some time."
In the end, the Court requested responses from Ravi and other respondent candidates who ran in the 2020 Karol Bagh election.
