2025:MHC:626 In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Reserved on Delivered on :

26.2.2025 07.3.2025 Coram :

The Honourable Mr.Justice N.ANAND VENKATESH Original Application No.103 of 2025 in Election Petition No.2 of 2024 Mr.Dayanidhi Maran ...Applicant in OA No.103 of 2025 & R2 in El.P.No.

2 of 2024 Vs

1.Mr.M.L.Ravi ...R1 in OA No.

103 of 2025 &

Petitioner in El.P.No.2 of 2024 The Election Commission of India, Nirvachan Sadan, 1, Ashoka Road, New Delhi-1.

The Chief Electoral Officer of Tamil Nadu, Public (Elections)

Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

(deleted/struck off from the array of respondents by order dated

21.1.2025 in O.A.No.890 of

2024 by NAVJ)

2.The Returning Officer, No.04-

Chennai Central Loksabha Constituency, Greater Chennai Corporation Zonal Office, Shenoy Nagar, Chennai-30. ...R2 in OA.No.

103 of 2025 & R1 in El.P.No.

2 of 2024 ORIGINAL APPLICATION under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules read with Order VI Rule 16 of the Civil Procedure Code seeking to strike off paragraphs 6 to 23 and 27 from Election Petition No.2 of 2024.

For Applicant : Mr.T.Mohan, SC for Mrs.M.Sneha For R1 : Mr.T.Sivagnanasambandan ORDER This is an application filed by the applicant under Order VI Rule

16 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) seeking to strike off the pleadings from paragraphs 6 to 23 and 27 in the main election petition.

2. Heard both.

3. The first respondent/election petitioner filed the main election petition seeking to (a) declare that the election held in Chennai Central Loksabha Parliament Constituency was not free and fair and was vitiated by undue influence; (b) declare that the accounts submitted were suppressed and exceeded the limit prescribed and were of corrupt practice; (c) declare that the accounts submitted were violative of Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short, the Act) and disqualify the applicant under Section 10-A of the Act; and (d) declare the election to the Chennai Central Loksabha Parliament Constituency as null and void.

4. In the main election petition, the first respondent alleged as follows :

(i) The campaign for the Loksabha elections came to an end on

17.4.2024. The "silence period" commenced whereby every one was expected to refrain from influencing the voters through any means till the conclusion of the polling as per Section 126 of the Act. However, the party, to which, the applicant belongs, gave a full page advertisement in four daily newspapers on 19.4.2024, which was the polling day and this was in violation of Section 126 of the Act and was a corrupt practice as per Section 123 of the Act.

(ii) The applicant had pasted stickers depicting his photograph, the symbol of the party, to which, he belongs and the leader of the party during the campaign in all the houses of the entire constituency. The expenditure of those stickers was not accounted for nor reflected in the accounts submitted by him towards election expenditure. The stickers did not bear the name of the publisher. The quantity of stickers that were printed was also not available and the stickers are still visible till date. Therefore, the cost of the stickers, which approximately worked out to Rs.58,50,000/-, was not added to the total expenditure.

(iii) Apart from that, the booth agents were provided with breakfast, lunch and tea expenses, which would cost at least Rs.100/- per head and which had led to incurring the additional expenses to the tune of Rs.1,15,300/-. Further, for the tables and chairs, which were provided near every polling booth for 1153 booths, the applicant incurred the further expenses to the tune of Rs.1,15,300/- and the applicant would have incurred the additional expenses of Rs.96,17,493/- in excess of the prescribed limit.

(iv) A massive rally was conducted on 14.4.2024 and 15.4.2024, for which, the applicant would have incurred expenses to the tune of Rs.96,51,493/-. But, this amount was also not accounted for. Therefore, the accounts that were submitted by the applic