Madras HC Dismisses Pleas Alleging Poll Affidavit Discrepancies Against TN CM Vijay, Udhayanidhi Stalin & Tamilisai Soundararajan

The Madras High Court on Wednesday dismissed a batch of writ petitions that alleged irregularities and discrepancies in the election affidavits filed by Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay, DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin and BJP leader Tamilisai Soundararajan.

The petitions, filed by individual voters, sought investigations by agencies including the Election Commission of India and the Income Tax Department into alleged inconsistencies in the candidates' disclosures of assets, income and financial interests.

What Were The Allegations?

The petitioners claimed that the candidates' Form 26 election affidavits contained discrepancies when compared with declarations made during previous elections or with other publicly available records.

In the case of Chief Minister Vijay, who led the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) to a strong performance in the 2026 Assembly elections, the plea pointed to a significant difference in the movable assets declared in affidavits filed for two constituencies. According to the petitioners, one affidavit reflected assets of around ₹105 crore, while another listed approximately ₹224 crore.

Udhayanidhi Stalin faced allegations relating to alleged variations in assets and loans, purported contradictions with corporate records, and the non-disclosure of certain investments linked to business entities, including Red Giant Movies.

The petition against Tamilisai Soundararajan alleged inconsistencies in income disclosures made between her 2024 Lok Sabha election affidavit and the affidavit filed for the 2026 Assembly polls.

Court Declines To Entertain Writ Petitions

A division bench comprising Chief Justice S.A. Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan dismissed the petitions, holding that such challenges cannot ordinarily be pursued through writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.

The court observed that allegations involving false declarations or inaccuracies in election affidavits are matters that must generally be challenged through an election petition under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.

No Direction For Income Tax Or EC Probe

The bench also declined to issue directions for a broader investigation by the Income Tax Department or other authorities. The judges noted that the High Court could not order roving inquiries into the allegations at the writ stage.

While the court had earlier sought responses from the Election Commission, the Income Tax Department and the candidates concerned, it ultimately found the petitions to be not maintainable in their present form.

No Criminal Findings Or Disqualification

The dismissal of the petitions does not amount to a finding on the merits of the allegations. The court neither recorded any criminal wrongdoing nor ordered any disqualification against the political leaders.

The ruling effectively reiterates the legal position that disputes relating to election affidavits and candidate disclosures must be pursued through the statutory election petition mechanism rather than through writ proceedings before the High Court.