The Indian Express ·
Crime, law and justice
Madras High Court bins challenge to DMK MLA Velu’s win: ‘955 rejected votes alarming’
In the Tamil Nadu Assembly election held earlier this year, DMK’s E V Velu won from the Tiruvannamalai constituency, defeating TVK candidate Arul Arumugam by a margin of 2,455 votes.
The Madras High Court has rejected a challenge to the election of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader E V Velu in the Tiruvannamalai Assembly poll held this year, rejecting the petitioner’s pleadings over alleged nomination, polling, postal ballot, counting and EVM irregularities. The court noted that the rejection of 955 postal ballots was “abnormal and alarming”, but said that even if all of them favoured the petitioner, they could not overcome the 2,455-vote victory margin.
Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy observed in the September 16 order that the plea was liable to be struck off as it failed to show how the election stood vitiated and, where allegations of corrupt practice were made, it lacked the details and supporting affidavit.
“The Election Petition, though it makes multiple and several allegations, does not contain a clinching material fact disclosing a triable issue to proceed with the Election Petition. Even read together, the allegations struck off fall short of making out material facts and a concise statement of any ground to declare the election void,” the order said.
The court added, “Despite this, the margin was only 2,455 votes. The election petition, though, categorically demonstrates the same; it does not clinchingly or concisely point out any single circumstance that vitiates the election so as to make out a triable issue to elicit the defence of the returned candidate.”
The Tamil Nadu Assembly election, including in Tiruvannamalai constituency, was held on April 23 this year, and the votes were counted on May 4. DMK’s Velu won with 88, 273 votes, while Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) candidate Arul Arumugam secured 85,818 votes. Velu won by a margin of 2,455 votes.
Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy observed that though the plea raised multiple allegations, it did not reveal a triable issue.
Arumugam challenged Velu’s election before the Madras High Court, alleging irregularities in nomination scrutiny, polling, postal-ballot counting, counting-day procedures and irregularities in the Electronic Voting Machine (EVM)/Voter-Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT).
Arumugam’s counsel, advocate B Aravind Srevasta, alleged discrepancies in Velu’s age details and non-disclosure of nine criminal cases that were mentioned in the 2021 election affidavit, besides improper conduct by DMK cadres during scrutiny. He also submitted that the returning officer failed to conduct a summary enquiry and pass a reasoned order.
He also argued that there were irregularities with reference to EVM/VVPAT, and there was a lack of transparency, documentation and procedural compliance in this regard. The machines were changed in two polling stations, 153 and 197 and documents show that Arumugam received more votes than the winning candidate in those two polling booths.
It was also contended that 955 postal ballots were rejected, which was abnormal and alarming, and that two persons associated with Velu were allowed to carry mobile phones inside the centre and make video calls, while other candidates were not allowed to do so.
Senior Advocate P Wilson, appearing for Velu, submitted that the election petition was based on vague allegations and did not contain specific facts and particulars required under Section 83 of the Representation of the People Act. He sought to strike out the relevant pleadings and reject the entire election petition.
‘Rejected ballots not enough to alter result’
The court observed that 955 postal ballots were rejected, but the margin of votes between the petitioner and the winning candidate was 2,455. “…even accepting that all the postal votes rejected were only in favour of the election petitioner, the counting illegality does not affect the outcome of the election,” it said.
The judge dismissed the petition, noting that though it raised multiple allegations, it did not contain a clinching material fact that revealed a triable issue. “No clear and triable issue was originally disclosed. And after the exercise of striking off pleadings, certainly no triable issue remains. The election petition is liable to be rejected as it does not disclose a cause of action,” it stated.
Challenge to TVK minister’s election dismissed
In a separate order, Justice G K Ilanthiraiyan of the Madras High Court dismissed a poll petition challenging TVK minister K A Sengottaiyan’s election from Gobichettipalayam.
The court held on September 15 that the plea questioning the validity of the notary’s attestation on Sengottaiyan’s Form 26 affidavit failed to show how it affected the election result. The Form 26 affidavit furnishes information on the candidate’s assets, liabilities, educational qualifications, criminal antecedents and public dues, if any.