The Madras High Court has dismissed an election petition challenging the victory of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam leader E V Velu in the Tiruvannamalai Assembly constituency, ruling that the plea lacked material facts and failed to present a triable cause of action.
In an order issued on September 16, Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy rejected the pleadings presented by the runner-up, Arul Arumugam of the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam. While noting that the rejection of 955 postal ballots during counting was abnormal and alarming, the court held that even if every discounted vote had been awarded to the petitioner, it would not have altered the final outcome given Velu’s 2,455-vote winning margin.
The state assembly polls took place on April 23 earlier this year, followed by counting on May 4. Velu secured 88,273 votes to defeat Arumugam, who garnered 85,818 votes.
Court Finds Lack Of Triable Grounds
Justice Chakravarthy observed that the petition failed to establish how the alleged irregularities vitiated the election process. The judge noted that the allegations regarding corrupt practices lacked necessary details and the requisite supporting affidavits.
The court stated that despite the wide array of claims put forward, the election petition contained no conclusive material facts establishing an issue that warranted trial. Consequently, the court ruled that the pleadings were liable to be struck out and the petition rejected for failing to disclose a valid cause of action.
During the proceedings, Senior Advocate P Wilson, representing Velu, argued for the complete rejection of the challenge. He submitted that the petition relied on vague allegations without the specific particulars and factual backing mandated under Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act.
Allegations Of Scrutiny And Counting Irregularities
Arumugam, represented by advocate B Aravind Srevasta, had approached the court seeking to nullify the election outcome on several grounds. The petitioner alleged procedural lapses during nomination scrutiny, polling, postal ballot evaluation, and the general counting process, alongside claimed faults in the handling of Electronic Voting Machines and Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail units.
The petition highlighted discrepancies concerning Velu’s declared age and pointed out that nine criminal cases mentioned in his 2021 election affidavit had not been disclosed in the current round. Arumugam also alleged that DMK cadres engaged in improper conduct during nomination scrutiny and claimed the returning officer failed to conduct a summary inquiry or issue a reasoned order.
On polling and counting logistics, the challenger raised concerns regarding transparency and compliance, pointing out that voting machines were swapped at polling booths 153 and 197, where records indicated Arumugam had led in votes. Furthermore, the petition argued that two associates linked to Velu were improperly permitted to bring mobile phones into the counting center to conduct video calls while others faced prohibitions.
Separate Challenge Against Minister Sengottaiyan Dismissed
In another ruling on September 15, the Madras High Court dismissed an election petition filed against TVK minister K A Sengottaiyan regarding his election from the Gobichettipalayam constituency.
Delivering that decision, Justice G K Ilanthiraiyan held that the challenge, which questioned the validity of the notary attestation on Sengottaiyan’s Form 26 affidavit, failed to demonstrate how the technical issue affected the election outcome. Form 26 requires candidates to furnish declarations concerning their assets, liabilities, educational qualifications, public liabilities, and criminal records.
