Major parties field tainted candidates despite Supreme Court directives; 39% are crorepatis with total assets worth Rs 2,403 crore

NEW DELHI – A comprehensive analysis of self-sworn affidavits by the Association for Democratic Reforms (ADR) and Kerala Election Watch has revealed that 38% of contesting candidates in the Kerala Assembly Elections 2026 have declared criminal cases against themselves, with 23% facing serious criminal charges.

The report analysed 863 out of 883 contesting candidates, finding that major political parties have largely ignored Supreme Court directives requiring them to disclose reasons for fielding candidates with criminal antecedents.

Alarming Criminal Background Across Parties

Among major parties, the Indian National Congress (INC) leads with 85% of its 85 analysed candidates having criminal cases, followed by the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) at 84%, the Communist Party of India (Marxist) at 66%, and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) at 63%.

“The directions of the Supreme Court have had no effect on the political parties in selection of candidates,” the report states emphatically. “This data clearly shows that political parties have no interest in reforming the electoral system and our democracy will continue to suffer at the hands of lawbreakers who become lawmakers.”

The Supreme Court had directed political parties to provide reasons for selecting candidates with criminal cases, with specific instructions that justification “shall be with reference to the qualifications, achievements and merit of the candidate concerned, and not mere ‘winnability’ at the polls.”

The analysis uncovered disturbing details:

· 15 candidates have declared cases related to crimes against women

· 1 candidate faces charges under IPC Section 376(2)(n) for “rape committed repeatedly on the same woman”

· 4 candidates have declared murder cases (IPC Section 302)

· 13 candidates face attempt to murder charges (IPC Section 307 and BNS Section 109)

The Rise of Money Power

Financial analysis reveals the growing influence of wealth in elections. The total assets of 863 analysed candidates stand at a staggering Rs 2,403 crore, with average assets per candidate rising from Rs 1.69 crore in 2021 to Rs 2.78 crore in 2026 – a 64% increase.

39% of all candidates (339 individuals) are crorepatis. Among major parties, the Kerala Congress leads with 100% of its 8 candidates being crorepatis, followed by IUML (84%), INC (72%), and CPI(M) (68%).

The top three wealthiest candidates are:

1. Reji Cheriyan (Kerala Congress, Kuttanad) – Rs 218.96 crore

2. Chenkal Rajasekharan (BJP, Neyyattinkara) – Rs 116.93 crore

3. Rajeev Chandrasekhar (BJP, Nemom) – Rs 111.99 crore

At the other end, eight candidates have declared zero assets, including an independent candidate from Malappuram and three BSP candidates.

Rajeev Chandrasekhar also tops the liability chart with declared liabilities of Rs 109.01 crore, while Dr. Prathap Kumar N (BJP, Kollam) reported the highest annual income at Rs 9.46 crore from his medical practice.

The report identifies 59 constituencies (42% of the total 140) as “Red Alert Constituencies” – where three or more candidates with criminal cases are contesting. Peravoor in Kannur district tops the list with 5 out of 11 analysed candidates having criminal cases.

Gender and Education Gaps

Only 11% of candidates are women (92 out of 863), with Janam Rashtriya Party fielding the highest percentage at 33%. Educationally, 143 candidates are graduates, 120 are postgraduates, and 17 hold doctorates, while one candidate remains illiterate.

The report calls for mandatory display of candidate information – including criminal records, assets, and educational qualifications – outside every polling booth. It also urges the Election Commission to strengthen voter awareness about the illegality of accepting cash or gifts for votes.

“Money and muscle power hurt the principles of free and fair elections, ‘participatory democracy’ and level playing field,” the report concludes. “The present circumstances demand an extensive deliberation by the voters so that sanctity of elections is not ridiculed.”

The analysis is based on affidavits obtained from the Election Commission of India website (www.eci.gov.in). ADR notes that 20 candidates could not be analysed due to incomplete or poorly scanned affidavits.