Justice Harisankar V. Menon passed the order in the election petition filed by Rasheed alleging that Akbar engaged in corrupt practices under Section 123(4) and 123(3A) of the Representation of People Act.

Section 123 of the RP Act lays down corrupt practices and a candidate, if found to be engaging in corrupt practice, may be disqualified as per the provisions of the Act. Sub-section (3A) makes it a corrupt practice the action of promoting and attempting to promote feelings of enmity and hatred between different classes of citizens on grounds of religion, race, caste, community, or language by a candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate.

It is a corrupt practice as per sub-section (4) when a candidate or his agent or any other person [with the consent of the candidate or his election agent] publishes any statement of fact which is false, and which he either believes to be false or does not believe to be true, in relation to the personal character or conduct of any candidate or in relation to the candidature, or withdrawal of any candidate, being a statement reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of that candidate's election.

As per the election petition, certain pamphlets and videos were circulated portraying Rasheed as culprit in the murder of former Chavakkad Municipality Chairman K.P. Valsalan in 2006. It is also stated that these pamphlets and video clippings showed Rasheed as a person against the Muslim community and due to the said calculated attempt by Akbar, a large number of electors, especially Muslims, voted against him.

Seeking immediate preservation of the same along with edit and deletion history, time stamps and other records, so that the same can be used as evidence in the election petition, Rasheed filed an interlocutary application. Allowing the same, the Court observed:

“On a prima facie consideration of the averments in the election petition as well as the affidavit accompanying this application, this Court is of the opinion that an interim direction as sought for is to be granted. Hence, there will be a direction to the Grievance Officer, Meta Platforms, INC., Meta Platforms, INC., represented by its Authorised Officer, the Resident Grievance Officer for YouTube, Google India Private Limited (Authorized representative of Google LLC in India), and the Google LLC (Parent entity of Youtube), represented through its Authorised Officer, to preserve the contents/information with respect to the uploaded videos etc. referred to above till further orders.”

The Court further issued summons to Akbar and other candidates, who are arrayed as respondents.

Case No: Election Petition No. 6 of 2026

Case Title: Abdul Rasheed C.H. @ C.H. Rasheed v. N.K. Akbar and Ors.

Click to Read/Download Order