The Madras High Court recently dismissed several petitions that questioned the accuracy of election affidavits filed by prominent Tamil Nadu politicians, including Chief Minister and leader of Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) Vijay, DMK’s Udhayanidhi Stalin, and BJP’s Tamilisai Soundararajan. These petitions sought a detailed examination of alleged discrepancies in the financial disclosures accompanying their nomination papers for the forthcoming Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly elections in 2026.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice SA Dharmadhikari and Justice G Arul Murugan, ruled against the allegations, thereby providing a significant reprieve to the politicians involved. Earlier, the Court had requested inputs from the Election Commission of India, the Income Tax Department, and related authorities to assess the validity of these claims.
Allegations Against Chief Minister Vijay
The petition against Vijay was initiated by V Vignesh, who claimed inconsistencies in the asset declarations made by Vijay in his Form 26 affidavits for the Perambur and Tiruchi East constituencies. Vignesh alleged that the affidavits revealed a stark contrast, with movable assets reported as ₹224 crore from Tiruchi East and ₹105 crore from Perambur. This discrepancy of over ₹100 crore was central to the claims of irregularity. Vijay, who later ascended to the role of Chief Minister under the TVK banner, was initially asked by the Court, along with the Election Commission and the Income Tax Department, to provide clarity on these allegations.
Scrutiny of Udhayanidhi Stalin’s Disclosures
The petition filed by R Kumaravelu against DMK’s Udhayanidhi Stalin sought an independent investigation into the differences between his asset declarations in the 2021 and 2026 election affidavits. The petitioner highlighted inconsistencies such as the omission of previously declared assets, unexplained loan variations, discrepancies between affidavit disclosures and corporate records, and potential mischaracterizations of financial transactions. The Income Tax Department had also submitted an affidavit noting some of these discrepancies.
Examination of Tamilisai Soundararajan’s Affidavits
Another petition was brought forth by Goutam Siva, challenging the income disclosures of Tamilisai Soundararajan. The discrepancies were observed when her 2026 Assembly election affidavit was compared with her 2024 Lok Sabha election disclosures. Soundararajan’s legal counsel dismissed the claims as frivolous, emphasizing that disputes concerning election affidavits should be addressed through an election petition under Section 80 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
More Read
Ultimately, the Madras High Court dismissed all three petitions, effectively closing the chapter on these claims of election affidavit irregularities, and reaffirming the status of the involved politicians.
