Holding that the inference sought to be drawn by the Governor without any relevant material cannot fall in category of "debatable" or "just conceivable," a five-judge Constitution Bench in majority verdict delivered Tuesday said it would fall in the category of "obviously perverse."

Bihar dissolution: Supreme Court indicts governor

"On facts, the inescapable inference is that the sole object of the Governor was to prevent the claim being made to form government and the case would fall under the category of bad faith," Chief Justice Y K Sabharwal, Justice B N Agarawal and Justice Ashok Bhan said in majority judgement.

Maintaining that it was not the case before the governor that the legislators were voting in violation of provisions of the Tenth Schedule vis-a-vis 91st Amendment, the Bench said the stage preventing members to vote against declared policies of the political party to which they belonged had not reached.

It was contended by the Centre that governor had information from many sources to conclude that the process that was going in the state was "destroying the very fabric of democracy."

However, the majority view opined that "that stage had not been reached" and the report of the Governor was "Intended to forestall any voting and staking of claim to form the Government."