Madras HC rejects election petition challenging Dayanidhi Maran's election victory

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court rejected the petition moved against the election victory of Central Chennai Parliamentary Member Dayanidhi Maran from the ruling party DMK.

Justice N Anand Venkatesh allowed the application of Dayanidhi Maran seeking to expunge certain pleadings against the election petition.

Since certain pleadings were removed the judge held no cause of action to survive in the election petition and rejected it.

The election petition was moved by the president of Desiya Makkal Sakthi Katchi and advocate ML Ravi seeking to declare Dayanidhi Maran's election victory as null and void, alleging that he breached the election model code of conduct.

The petitioner relied upon Section 126 of the Representation of the People (RP) Act, 1951, which prohibits all election campaigning works before 48 hours of polling day.

“But the DMK candidate of Central Chennai constituency advertised in all popular newspapers on the polling day in a way of campaigning for his party, which influenced the voters,” he said.

It was also submitted that the DMK candidate pasted stickers depicting his photograph, his party leader and his symbol on the houses of the voters as a part of the campaign.

Further, the respondent was involved in a mass rally around the constituency he contested, however, the expenditure for these campaign activities of Dayanidhi Maran was not reflected in his accounts submitted to the ECI, which is in violation of section 77 (1) of RP act, said the petitioner.

Aggrieved by the election petition, Dayanidhi filed an application seeking to expunge certain pleadings against him.

In that application, the MP sought to expunge the paragraphs alleging he published advertisements on print and electronic media during the day of the polling as against the model code of conduct.

Also, the portions alleging he extravagantly conducted a campaign during the day of polling.

The MP sought to remove those paragraphs from the petition as he didn't have any involvement in the act on those grounds raised by the petitioner, he contended. The advertisements were arranged by his party and he did not participate in the alleged campaign conduct on the polling day, said Dayanidhi.