He then won the 1984 Lok Sabha Election from the Faridabad Lok Sabha constituency by a margin of 1,34,371 votes over the previous seat holder Tayyab Husain, receiving 53.1% of the total votes cast in the constituency that year. This was a momentous victory for Shri Rahim Khan, and it cemented his popularity among the people of Faridabad.[1]
He has also written the book "Writing the History of Meos" to preserve the culture of ethnic Meos.[6]
Controversies
Rahim Khan vs Khurshid Ahmed on 8 August, 1974
High Court judgement
When Chaudhary Rahim Khan was elected for his second term in Haryana's Legislative Assembly in 1972, he defeated Khurshid Ahmed, who was a sitting minister at that time. Following this humiliating defeat, Khurshid Ahmed filed a case in the Punjab and Haryana High Court against Chaudhary Rahim Khan and challenged the election on various grounds of corrupt practices.
Bribery (Section 123(1)): Khurshid Ahmed alleged that Chaudhary Rahim Khan gave a vehicle to another candidate with the assurance that he would repay the expenses spent in using it for the election campaign. This accusation, however, was not established since there was no evidence to indicate that financial help was supplied to convince the candidate not to withdraw from the race.
Appeal to Faith (Section 123(3)): Chaudhary Rahim Khan and his supporters were accused of delivering speeches that appealed to Muslim voters to vote for Shri Rahim Khan because he was a "true Muslim" whilst labelling Khurshid Ahmed as a non-believer. Chaudhary Rahim Khan was booked under this section as this was considered a corrupt practice under Section 123(3).
Character Assassination (Section 123(4)): Khurshid Ahmed Chaudhary alleged that Chaudhary Rahim Khan had distributed handbills containing false allegations against Khurshid Ahmed, including charges of womanising and forcing Muslims to eat pork, and threatening divine displeasure if voters elected Khurshid Ahmed Chaudhary. These allegations were considered a corrupt practice under Section 123(4).
The distribution of damaging handbills was crucial evidence in the case. The court found acceptable, direct, and circumstantial testimony that the handbills were distributed with the knowledge and consent of Chaudhary Rahim Khan, which led to the finding of corrupt practices. Hence, Chaudhary Rahim Khan was booked under sections 123(3) and (4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 for appealing to voters' religion and character assassination of Khurshid Ahmed. However, the High Court dismissed the allegation of bribery under Section 123(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
Appeal in the Supreme Court of India
Chaudhary Rahim Khan decided to appeal this case in the Supreme Court of India. The bench that heard the case consisted of Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, Justice Bhagwati, P.N. and Justice Palekar, D.G. The court dismissed the appeal, however, the court judgement stated the following:
"The appellant, in this case, is less guilty than the 1st respondent depicts him but is less innocent than he professes."
—Supreme Court of India, 'Rahim Khan vs Khurshid Ahmed and Ors' on 8 August, 1974 [7]
This case is titled "Rahim Khan vs Khurshid Ahmed and Ors on 8 August, 1974" and still holds significant notability in Indian legal history and continues to be part of the curriculum in many Indian law schools to this day. [7]