O.A.No.8 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 01.09.2022

PRONOUNCED ON : 18.10.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

O.A.No.8 of 2022

in

Election Petition No.9 of 2021

Ashok Kumar.K

... Applicant

Vs.

1.T.Senguttuvan

2.Chandramohan.K.M

3.Tamilselvan.S.

4.Ameenulla

5.Sasikumar.K.S.

6.Nirandari.V.

7.Ravishankar

8.Ruthramani.T

1/42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.A.No.8 of 2022

9.Vijayakumar.R

10.TVS.Gandhi

11.Kumaresan.M

12.Gopinath.M.

13.Sakthi.K

14.Sivan.C

15.The Election Commission of India

Represented by its Chief Election Commissioner

Nirvachan Sadan,

Ashoka Road, New Delhi 110 001.

16.The Chief Electoral Officer,

Tamil Nadu Election Commission of India

Public (Elections) Department,

Secretariat, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

17.The District Collector cum District

Returning Officer, District Collector Office,

Krishnagiri District,

Tamil Nadu – 635 001.

18.The Returning Officer

53, Krishnagiri Assembly Constituency,

Krishnagiri Taluk Krishnagiri District,

Tamil Nadu – 635 122.

19.G.Karpagavalli

…Respondents

2/42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.A.No.8 of 2022

Prayer: Judges Summon filed under Order XIV Rule 8 of Original

Side read with Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure,

1908, to reject the petition bearing number Election Petition No.9 of

2021 filed under Section 80 of Representation of Peoples Act before

this Court.

For Applicant

:

Mr.V.Ayyathurai

Senior Counsel

For Respondent 1

:

Mr.Richardson Wilson

for M/s.P.Wilson Associates

ORDER

The 1^st respondent in an Election Petition has filed the above

application to reject the Election Petition.

2. Before proceeding to consider the rejection application, it

would be necessary to briefly set out the facts that had culminated in

3/42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.A.No.8 of 2022

the filing of the Election Petition. The 1^st respondent herein belongs

to the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam and had contested in the General

Election to the legislative assembly that was held on 06.04.2021. The

applicant herein had also contested the said election and he was

declared elected by a margin of 794 votes. The applicant herein had

in all secured 96,050 votes. The 1^st respondent herein came second

with a total of 95,256 votes.

3. Aggrieved by the facts that certain anomalies and corrupt

practices had taken place, the 1^st respondent had come forward with

the instant Election Petition to declare the election of the applicant

herein to No.53, Krishnagiri Assembly in the State of Tamil Nadu on

02.05.2021 as illegal, void and to set aside the same and declare the

1^st respondent herein as duly elected to the said constituency.

4. The election has been challenged on the grounds, which are

set out herein below:

4/42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.A.No.8 of 2022

(a)Suppression in the Form 26 affidavit filed by the

applicant, as the details of all the properties of the

applicant had not been set out.

(b)Distribution of cash for votes.

(c)Usage of the Official machinery for securing

maximum votes.

(d)Exceeded the maximum election expenditure.

(e)Plastering of walls of public properties with the

symbol of the party, to which the applicant belonged.

(f)The improper rejection of postal ballot votes.

(g)Deficiency and irregularities in counting of votes

in the EVMs.

5. The 1^st respondent had entered appearance in the above

petition and on 13.12.2021, he has filed an application to reject the

5/42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

O.A.No.8 of 2022

Election Petition. The grounds on which the said application has been

filed are as follows:

(i)Order IV Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure

has not been complied with since the affidavit

contemplated therein has not been filed and to add to the

procedural anomalies the duplicate copy of the election

petition was also not filed into Court.

(ii)The election petitioner had not complied with